| 8:52 am on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
>Each time I think I have figured it out after days of research, Yahoo changes the algo.
Yet, in another post we see that Yahoo is "old & Stale" and never re-indexises and never changes its algo?
Give us a break peeps......
Here on WW we get to read that Yahoo never changes, Yahoo changes too much, Yahoo is old, Yahoo is outdated.
The story is simply a load of nonsence.
| 2:38 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yahoo is one of the least customer friendly organizations I have ever dealt with. Their arrogance is legendary.
A few years ago, our company's website suffered an Inktomi penalty. This mystified us since we are a 25 year old company with 180 employees and would never do anything underhanded. Many, many sites suffered similar fates.
Then Yahoo purchased Ink and started using their crappy results. They simply transfered the Ink penalty and our site disappeared completely from Yahoo's search results, even for our company's name. We have written Yahoo several times and have gotten zero response.
The number of quality sites that rank well in G and MSN but cannot be found in Yahoo ought to be of concern to them, but it is not. They continue to bury their head in the sand and operate like a typical monopoly.
As an investor, when I see a company needing to expand through acquisitions (read Overture), alarms go off in my head. While this purchase decision may have been a strategic one, I wonder what Yahoo's results would have looked like if you extracted the Overture income?
I'd bet it would demonstrate a company on the decline. Google is a lean, mean, focused competitor while MSN is a rising tide. Like everything else, quality would win out in the end and my bet is on these two tigers.
If I had Yahoo shares in my portfolio, you can bet I would start dumping them.
| 4:43 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Seems everyone here is a bit more techie than me but the problem is the same. My hotel ranked first page on all 3 major se's by name and by the most important terms as determined via Word Tracker. In Jan I read something about using a 301 redirect to the www version of my site. It was like a bomb dropped. The site completely dissappeared from Yahoo. Only a few interior pages are showing deep in the results.
Can someone tell me besides having our host set up the 301 redirict, are there other things I must do within the site?
Again...is this www vs non-www and 301's a smoking gun on Yahoo?
| 9:10 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
sachac, you said it right on the money.
| 3:32 pm on Mar 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Our site was dropped from Yahoo when they broke with google and the only page they list is our homepage. I gave up on them because of my good rankings with google, but not I've dropped from google via supplemental/canonical issues and need some traffic.
How the do I get indexed? I've submitted a urllist.txt but nothing. Inktomi Slurp has looked at a few pages but nothing. Yahoo denies blacklisting us.
Msn has quite a few pages from our site indexed but they don't show up in their search results. The only way to find the indexed pages is "site:".
| 7:58 pm on Mar 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I've decided to write to Yahoo about the problems we're having with our site not being listed in the organic results. And no I don't mean an email. I mean a package of documents about our situation and some details about our category and the directory sites the engine seems to favor, the arrogant emails from Yahoo staff about our situation, how it's search engine traffic is a "gift", and the general lack of communication within their organization. Directory support, Platinum support, Search, etc... No one seems to have a clue how to even contact another department.
There is no reason at all why our site should not be listed in the top 10. Plenty of unique content, a quality design, unique features, and no blackhat tactics. We are a manufacturer, not an affiliate.
We're sending this package to Jeff Weiner Senior Vice President Search and Marketplace as well as David and Jerry the two founders in the hopes that we can get some attention on the problem.
We just spent 500K on a new site and I'll be damed if I'm going to just accept that we have to spend 5-15K a month in the PPC just to get listed, certainly not with the crap they are listing on the first and second pages.
Anyways I'll let you all know if this has any impact. I figure a FedEx delivery to several senior level people may have more significance than an email that can be deleted and ignored.
Here's hoping anyways.
Signed - A VERY frustrated webmaster
| 10:05 pm on Mar 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Whilst as a fellow webmaster and designer i can understand your frustration if you read Yahoos terms and conditions they do not "Have to list your site" nor give any reason for the way they organise their serps nor "is it yout right to be listed.
We work on many sites, some rank well, others dont alots down to the content the owners put in, the way its presented and the quality of the site and its backlinks.
Sure we would like all sites to rank well in Yahoo and believe that all the sites we work on are top notch sites in their own way and should all rank top of the serps for their respective authority but then again so does every other webmaster!.
If you do site:www.yoursite.com in Yahoo, you can see how many pages you have in its index
next do linkdomain:www.yoursite.com in Yahoo to establish how many back links you have in it.
Then compare the results of that to the sites that rank in the top ten of your sector. If you are light in these areas its time to work on the weak area. Also note how many results you are competing against, it may take longer that you would imagine to start ranking - are you in the Yahoo directory?.
IMO for what its worth it may be your site that has the problem not Yahoo. It could be that your site does not have some of the factors that Yahoo is looking for?.
All in all Yahoo is not msn, Google, teoma or any other search engine for that matter. It has its own algo and you need to be aware that what works for google doest work for yahoo.
At the end of the day, im not defending Yahoo as i fully understand the frustration having had sites in the past of our own that didnt rank, some of them now do, others dont but we have a good idea what they need, but your letter and details to yahoo imo will prove to be a waste of time and thats simply because they dont have to list anyone - to guarantee position you need to buy it via overture and they make this very clear in the webmaster notes
If i were in your position i would spend your time working out what to do to improve your site so that you start ranking better in the future.
Whilst this reply doesnt help resolve your ranking issue im hoping you can see this as it is.
Im sure Yahoo have nothing against your site and even if the chairman of Yahoo Europe thought your site was the best site on the entire web he would be unable to do anything to assist it ranking due to the number of factors that go into the algo that no one man can control - hence why all your letter is likely to get is a sorry you are not satisfied, confirmation if you are or are not blacklisted or at best an engineer will look to see if your site has any obvious spider issue problems but if your site is listed in Yahoo (even if its position 1000) its not a spider issue.
All the very best of luck to you
P.S if you want to sticky me your url i would be happy to have a quick look at your site to see if anything obvious needs addressing and give some pointers on the areas to work on which could help you to rank better
| 12:30 am on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I would like to figure out why a site:www search for my domain is only showing my homepage as Cached, while 100 links to pages I removed from my site last summer are still listed in Yahoo's index 8 months later. Also no new pages indexed.
This domain was never banned from Yahoo, else a site:www search would show nothing.
| 1:41 am on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
If you search for your site by site:www.domain.com and all that is returned is your home page, the site has been penalized. When Yahoo penalizes a site, it allows the index, or home page, to remain. All other pages are removed, although the purge of those pages can take some time. During this purge phase all but the home page appear without any snippet; just title and URL.
| 2:08 am on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
How do I best get it unpenalized? What should I ask Yahoo?
| 2:11 am on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yeah ... my site does very well in both G&M and not so well ... but not too badly on Y.
|I get the impression that Yahoo directory listings don't count for as much as they did, and that Yahoo is giving more weight to megasites and subdomain crosslinking schemes such as About.com's. |
I agree. I also think Yahoo is where Google was about two + years ago before the Florida update. The Google SERPS were dominated by spammy sites and "directory" type sites which were really just lists and more lists. Their keyword density tolerance level was also about double what it is today.
What used to work on Google, and MSN also worked on Yahoo. The difference is that Google and MSN have moved on with new filters and algos. Most webmasters (who are not SEO's) have realized what works best for them on Google and MSN and (after much hand wringing) have gone with the flow and adjusted their sites. Afterall, G&M drive the majority of traffic.
Unfortunately, Yahoo has not kept pace with the other engines and tend to reward keyword stuffed sites and as EFV said, megasites and subdomain crosslinking also works. The same old sites using the same old stuff which was accepted practice back two and three years ago are at the top of the SERPS.
To me, its like looking back in time when I search on Y.
| 2:31 am on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Quoting RichTC: "....if you read Yahoos terms and conditions they do not "Have to list your site" nor give any reason for the way they organise their serps nor "is it yout right to be listed. ..."
You are correct. YAHOO can do anything they please. But on the other hand when you consider the power they posess in that much of the worlds' population seeks their services millions of times a day to find information about things that can change everyone and everything in the World, you would think they would be concerned about doing the best they can do. If I had the power that they do and someone came to me with substantial documentation showing that I had COMPLETELY missed the boat then I'd have to think that it was not an isolated case and that maybe millions of people were not getting good information. Either YAHOO is purposely skewing returns to froce more pay per click or they have their heads way up their dirt chutes and if that's the case we all need to applaud anyone who will face them nose to nose with real documentation.
My hats off to MARKETINGMAGIC.
| 2:33 am on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Last year Yahoo was a great traffic and sales producer for me, until my use of "rpower" software got a couple of my sites banned. :(
Last summer, I immediately pulled all my spam pages from my domain that wasn't caught, but the possible penalty (if there is one) did not occur until weeks after I removed the offending pages and cleaned up my site. I can't imagine a penalty being meted out after a site was cleaned up of all it's blackhat stuff.
I'm afraid to ask Yahoo about my situation, because they might decide to do something worse, or I might say the wrong thing. A few months ago, I did ask them if my use of a wildcard character /*.* in robots.txt could have caused the problem and they replied that it likely did since wildcards are not supported by the robots exclusion protocal.
Isn't MSN much smaller than Yahoo? I read it's only 10% of the market share.
| 6:47 am on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My site have a good results from google and MSN and bad results in Yahoo, but it is a new site.
My visits are from Google only.
| 1:21 pm on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
A SEO professional I talked to, told me I will have to ask Yahoo.
I'm not sure how I should word my message. I should probably be honest and admit to having earlier used 'rpower' software to generate directory-style pages even though I stopped using it 8 months ago.
| 1:51 pm on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for the reply - just so it's clear our site did have some sort of penalty instituted last June.
The company I work for had hired an SEO (before I started), who must have done something (he did get them involved in some sort of linking scheme), or it was something they had done in-house with the site, but in any event it resulted in the ban.
Previous to this they had enjoyed decent rankings for their core keywords. Then with the above ban, all listings were dropped. When I contacted Y! to enquire, they just gave me the generic email along with a quote about search engine traffic being a "gift". While I generally agree with this, coming from a rep from a company who we are paying over 10K a month to rubbed me the wrong way. I know PPC and Organic are two separate divisions, but I don't care. I still think its arrogant and just plain rude.
When you consider we are an actual manufacturer and have been around for almost 20years, and then look at the 90% directory crap sites in the serps for our keywords, you have to sit there and scratch your head wondering how not listing our site would possibly benefit Yahoo's search users. Especially since we've launched a brand new 500K site with so many unique features and content it'd make your head spin. I can however see how it benefits Yahoo Ė we now have to bid on all our terms and spend even more money. And Iíll be sure to ask them in my FedEx package if this in any way is what has motivated the ďbanĒ.
I know SEO pretty well (been at this for 6yrs) and I know the site isn't breaking any rules. (No bad inbound/outbound links, no repetitive keywords in content, meta, etc..) The site is so clean you could eat off it. So from a technical and TOS stand point, there is no reason for them to not list the site, unless I am a complete moron and have overlooked something.
So this, coupled with the last 4 months of trying to get someone at directory support to help us update the 6year old listing we have, has pushed us to take action. For all the money we spend with this company I just can't believe this is how they choose to treat good customers and their search users.
| 2:41 pm on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
You can spot a penalized site in Yahoo, as noted above if you search site:www.domain.com and all you get is the index, or just the index and all other pages are just title and URL only. It is not rare or unusual to incur a penalty with Yahoo. Lots of people have penalized sites and they think there just not ranking well. The fact is if youíre an affiliate, have multiple hyphens in your domain, are linking, (even in a light fashion) between your sites, have multiple sites with duplicate content, and a host of other pretty benign things going on, they will penalize you. Why, would be an excellent topic to discuss.
If you do have a penalty you canít make it any worse, so you want to go through the motions. First thing to do is confirm the penalty with Yahoo. To do that go here;
Skip over the ridiculous instructions at the top about entering in a unique sentence in quotation marks and see if your site appears. The fact is all sites remain in the index even when penalized, so this exercise is pointless. Scroll down a bit and fill out the form, if you think you know the problem, clean it up and tell them so.
You will get a response from Yahoo with a vague statement like, ďyour site may not meet the Yahoo guidelinesĒ, get anything other than a direct statement saying you are not penalized, and you are penalized. The most they offer in terms of an explanation is to go look at their guidelines at; [help.yahoo.com...]
If you get confirmation you are penalized, try and fix the problem, donít assume anything. The majority of sites that are penalized are due to some sort of linking scenario, or they are connected due to a common server. You may want to read this here; [research.yahoo.com...] this came out just before there was a big wave of sites penalized. Best I can gather from it is they run some sort of query looking for linked sites, or common servers (pretty clumsy as in thereís a lot of babies that go out with the bath water).
After you have addressed what you think the problem might be, (and again you have to get off the ďthereís nothing wrong with my site thinking) There probably isnít in terms of Google, but the issue is Yahoo, and some sort of filter was tripped, or a hand penalty applied, so something caused the penalty to be applied, fair or not. Youíre out until you change it.
Once you get to the bottom of it go here; [add.yahoo.com...]
This is for requesting a second review on your site. You want to be careful with this, the guidelines say you get two looks and thatís it. They will give you more but DO NOT submit your site unless you are very, very confident you have fixed the problem, because most likely you have not.
Good luck and the most productive thing you can do is try and figure out what they didnít like, and not keep thinking thereís nothing wrong with your site, and itís all been a big mistake. Itís not about right or wrong, or proving a point, itís about getting your site back in. Also donít cry about ranking, keep the focus on the penalty. You canít rank when youíre penalized so thatís got nothing to do with it. And lastly be nice, itís their search engine and they make the rules.
| 3:08 pm on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Excellent post randle! Thanks! This will help me a lot.
It's entirely possible my "resources" reciprocal links pages might contain a few links to bad link partners' sites. I have no automated way of checking them, so I would have to manually check each site which would be very slow. I have one links page that ended up with 41 links. I could ask Yahoo about it.
Last month, I did put in a "User-Agent: Slurp Disallow: /resources/" in my robots.txt for now but I don't know how much good that will do. Sometimes spiders don't always obey robots.txt.
If I know I am guilty of having used spam software in the past, but removed all traces of it long ago, before the penalty occurred, should I still admit to it when contacting yahoo?
My site is an affiliate site since it makes money from affiliate programs, but I completely redesigned it as a content site with the affiliate stuff must less obvious. Before contacting Yahoo, maybe I should first remove my Google ads from my homepage.
| 3:45 pm on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
If I were an investor holding Yahoo! shares, I'd file a class action suit against the managerial incompetents who allowed this massive deterioration of the company's product. What a monster f*-up, to fumble and drop all that Yahoo! had formerly achieved in the marketplace.
| 10:06 pm on Mar 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Possible reinclusion request I might use:
It appears my site: http:/www.********.com may be under some kind of penalty. a Yahoo site:www.********.com is only showing my homepage as 'Cached' and none of my other pages on my site are being indexed. I also noticed a large number of dead links in your index to pages I removed from my site last summer.
I'm not sure what could have caused a penalty, but I admit that in the past, up until July 05, I was using a program called "Rankingpower" to generate directory-style pages. I have discontinued my use of this program and removed all it's associated pages long ago (back in July) and I have since rebuilt my site as a real content site with lots of unique hand-written content.
I have been involved with reciprocal link exchanges for a long time, but I'm not sure if my reciprocal links pages could be the problem http:/www.*********.com/resources. Earlier this year, I put in "User-agent: slurp
Disallow: /resources/" in robots.txt. I currently have no automated method of checking my link partners for bad sites.
Please let me know if there is a problem with my site I need to fix to get re-indexed.
| 11:25 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I know a lot of you are not going to beleive this, but I rank #2 in G for my highest traffic KWP, #1 or 2 on MSN (depending on which day you look!) and I recently got bumped up to #1 at Y! during all this mess they are going through.
This is no small KWP either, G shows:
"Results 1 - 10 of about 53,900,000"
So it is a very, very competitive KWP.
Funny part is, I have no idea why I moved up in Y! during this latest BS/shake up over there. I'm thinking it has everything to do with so many other sites dropping out of my way...
[edited by: martinibuster at 1:46 am (utc) on April 4, 2006]
[edit reason] Profanity [/edit]
| 11:37 pm on Mar 30, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Can someone please delete the post above this one? Somehow I screwed it all up and it posted twice. Once at the end of page 8 and once at the top of page 9.
Dup content concerns?
| 5:03 am on Apr 3, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My site got 20K hits from Yahoo's bot and the second most common bot was MSN with over 4800 hits in March 2006.
Now keep in mind that we really only have Google, MSN, and Yahoo as the major players in the search engine category. Everyone else is either running deep runs randomly every other or few months or running light runs (such as Ask) each month.
Most of the "search engines" use a different database which includes Yahoo's. So why would words appear with high ranking that use Yahoo's database on say Hotbot or Dogpile but not show up in Yahoo's own search? I think macneil has the idea. While they all share the same database of crawled information I believe Yahoo in this case is trying to squeeze some income based off of the SERP inconsistency. However I honestly think this will hurt them in the long run.
As far as I am concerned I rarely check Yahoo's rankings. I'm so unimpressed by the lack of response in ratio to it's exceedingly high crawl rate (five times that of MSN and sometimes up to TEN times that of Google some months) that I have seriously considered just outright banning Slurp. However this would effect third party search engines that yield fair SERPS plus I have tons of bandwidth to burn.
Search engine shares are much different from browser shares but if Yahoo keeps this up they'll become the Netscape 4 of search engines. I do not find their results very useful personally.
I am a Google user and typically will several times a week get P.O.ed and switch to MSN to find something I can't on Google. None of the search engines are particularly good at multi valued string searches. Lots of times I'll have to put bobs example widgets as bobs "example widgets" with quotes though the average consumer will not know to do this!
| 10:01 am on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'd like to say a big thank you to randle, as his suggestion has done the trick for me.
After months of the same pages appearing in Yahoo (even the ones that no longer exist) I cleaned up a few things (spcifically my robots) and sent off the review request, 24 hours later... bam... Yahoo picks up all my new pages and removes the old ones.
Now to work on getting some better rankings...
| 1:35 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
What does it mean if Yahoo is suddenly now reindexing my site including new pages, but isn't caching them? Is there a lag in caching process, after indexing? Just the homepage is cached. They are also still retaining 8-month old dead links to long deleted pages.
Does Yahoo ever lift a penalty upon request without sending a reply to the website owner?
| 4:27 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Well I didn't get a reply Webdetective.
I am caching properly however. Maybe you just need to give them a bit more time?
| 8:00 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Maybe I was under penalty and it's just now being lifted. This site of mine was fortunately never banned from Yahoo for my earlier use of software-generated doorway pages last year, but maybe my sudden deletion of hundreds of such pages all at once raised a red flag, or else confused Slurp.
| 9:16 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I have been noticing some changes in my Yahoo site: index today. They appear to be reindexing my site and adding my new pages to the yahoo site: index, but still just my homepage is the only page getting cached. Also I still see most of my dead links to my former rankingpower pages in the Yahoo index.
Anyway I'm happy Google has at least finally updated my backlinks and pagerank after waiting 4 months. Still waiting for a flood of Google traffic to start coming in.
| 3:29 pm on Apr 10, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Hi, I have this problem, nothing from Yahoo, traffic from MSN/Google.
I have asked them but just got the canned response which is not much use.
I am wondering if the problem is caused by the site being on a shared server, perhaps there are alot of poor sites hosted on the same server which is pulling my site down?
Is there a common thread to this problem?
| 8:54 pm on Apr 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Before I read this thread I posted a message about the www thing at [webmasterworld.com...] . That problem seems to be the only discernable common denominator.
One does have to realize that Yahoo is a very different company that Google/MSN. Yahoo seems more marketing oriented (as opposed to technical) and search doesn't seem that much of a priority to them. That may sound rediculous to many because Yahoo is perceived as the "arch-search engine", but it's only quite recent that Yahoo produces it's own search results.
What they do have is that wonderful website with all of it's different services that they bring into to surfer's view very well. In that sense they are miles ahead of Google.
By and large, the errors in Yahoo's algo are probably of minor concern to the corporation as a whole.
| 9:34 pm on Apr 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Does a page that Yahoo has indexed necessarily have to be Cached in order to function?
Yahoo has indexed my more recent pages, but isn't caching them.
| This 106 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 106 ( 1 2  4 ) > > |