| 10:33 am on Oct 7, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|Fast's results are looking extremely similar to the current Google SERPs |
Not if you are looking for information on "[some regional searchterm]"
[edited by: heini at 10:43 am (utc) on Oct. 7, 2002]
[edit reason] no specific urls/searches please / thanks! [/edit]
| 10:39 am on Oct 7, 2002 (gmt 0)|
The fast results aren't remotely similar to Google results for anything I search for.
| 11:53 am on Oct 7, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I should have been more specific. I meant in very competitive areas.
| 12:00 pm on Oct 7, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I think that in very competitive market place you will always get "seo grouping" its the nature of the business we are in.
Fast, Google, MSN etc The Traffic Generators will always be targeted by SEO's the lesser SE's will have different SERP's
"there may be many fish in the sea, but you can only carry so many in your boat"
| 1:50 pm on Oct 7, 2002 (gmt 0)|
"I should have been more specific. I meant in very competitive areas."
Same comment, as a general rule, the results aren't remotely similar.
| 2:00 pm on Oct 7, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Well, with a rough 2 Bill index on each I'd be rather cautious with general rules on similarity.
Not astonishingly I - like everybody else here - could easily name examples for both, close similarity and wide gaps.
Of course we don't name any searches.
Comparing serps is always somewhat awkward. Take a search with 1Mill results in Google, and lets say 999.000 in ATW and 998.000 in Ink.
Do you know how many of those results are in all three? Do you know how many links are known in each SE?
Just to add to the confusion: I follow a serp which is so close between Google and INK, I once had thought AOL had been switching to Google a couple of days before it really started.