| 11:11 pm on May 25, 2006 (gmt 0)|
i think the past 2 updates have been bad. in 2005 and up until late jan/early february 2006 the results were much better/cleaner... went really bad around mid feb. little bit improved in this update. they should roll back to pre february scoring.
| 11:24 pm on May 25, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I have a site that went from top ten for a search phrase to around 100. Interesting thing is that an alternate sub-domain (beta instead of www) is showing up higher (than the www) in the SERPS when the page is otherwise, exactly the same...
| 11:44 pm on May 25, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Strange, so far i have fared very well in this update...not seeing much of a bump int traffic though
| 11:50 pm on May 25, 2006 (gmt 0)|
For me, I don't care. For my "big" keyword, I'm #1 in MSN, fluctuating 3 - 5 in Google, yet Google drives 50 times more traffic than MSN. Yeah, 50 times.
My niche is business people in the online space.
| 12:01 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
This is the worst MSN update I've ever seen. Quality sites dropping out of sight everywhere. Adsense spammers are running wild. It's apparent spammers know how to work this engine. While everybody was worrying about their Google ranks spammers were setting up thousands of worthless blog and article links for the new MSN Explorer 7.0 search on MSN feature. Mission accomplished.
This search engine will soon join the ranks of the fallen. Really pathetic.
| 12:20 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
MSN has no idea what they are doing. Period.
It's as if they are trying to rank everything that should not rank... put up keyword subdomain, spam 200,000 blogs, make sure you have absolutely zero links from high quality sites in every niche. Bleech.
| 1:02 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Odd results. Home page went to #11 for a one word term. An internal page only tangentially relevant to the term moved to #6. Yet, another internal page that is spot on for that term is no where to be found.
Then there are those sites of questionable editorial quality that benefit from huge numbers of links - like sitewide links amongst interelated phony directories - that are ranking quite nicely. FWIW, Google is doing a much better job of filtering out those useless links these days.
| 1:52 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I just did some more testing. Very disheartening. Come on MSN you CAN do better. I just don't get it. I'm doing finance-related searches on popular topics and MFA sites rule.
I keep staring at my computer shaking my head, the results are really bad. It's like hoping the underdog is going to score and the other team just intercepted and ran for a touchdown.
Come on MSN!
| 2:39 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I see spam, .org, mfa were we used to be. Our site (PR6) now has our company job openings page (domain.com/jobs.html) as a main result for our niche. Our index page is not even listed :-)
I guess Google must be laughing big time.
| 3:08 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I am pretty sure this algo is going to be fine tuned in the next couple days.
Ironicaly I have suffered ranking loss on all my terms yet I have an above average adsense day lol.
Anyway, I am sure things will go back to something more reasonable shortly
| 3:10 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|I am pretty sure this algo is going to be fine tuned in the next couple days. |
I have to say that I agree. I had an outburst earlier when the update began, but after MSNdude asked me for examples, I took a step back. It is hard for me to be patient, but I think they are working on it. They seem concerned about our feedback and getting it right.
| 3:54 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I hate to sound negative but I am even seeing this subdomain spam on some of the top 1000 keywords. Some are so broad I could mention them here but I will not since it may go against TOS.
I hope MSN has a real update instead of the same junk moved around in different places.
| 4:44 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
We came through pretty well. Most of our keywords stayed the course. Surprised by it actually, expected worse after all the comments.
| 5:13 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Itís giving very different results for US English and UK English key phrases (mostly z and s thing)
| 6:38 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"I am pretty sure this algo is going to be fine tuned in the next couple days."
It should have been finetuned before releasing it! This is far from quality. When I buy something I want the supplier to deliver a properly working product. I don't want him to ask for examples and to come back several times to finetune it, while in the mean time I'm loosing money because of his clumsiness.
| 7:14 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
What exactly did you purchase?
You also have to understand that many things can not be tested localy. Sometimes you have to release a product (or in this case an alogorithm) to the masses in order to make it better.
| 7:36 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I disagree with nearly all of the comments so far. In my area, the results are starting to show real quality.
| 8:28 am on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Just to confirm what other people have already stated, keywords in the URL or page name seems to play a large part.
| 12:38 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Keywords in page name and url are the oldest, lamest seo tactics. Who is in charge over there?
Its good to not and try to be Google, but lets not try and be Excite.
| 12:58 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Ive just lost interested with msn
They still cant deep crawl sites - the bot is next to useless
The results are poor for most keywords and once you look for three keyword strings upwards you can count them out.
The reason why the results are so poor is imo due to the crawling issues. A big site with 50,000 pages will be lucky to get 2,000 listed, meanwhile Google can spider and index an entire
The only thing msn do well is let spammers rank in the top 10 for sites put together in a couple of days - msn is the easiest search engine to spam by far and its not difficult to get a site ranking top of the serps quickly.
Msn are still playing at search imo
| 1:33 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
>Keywords in page name and url are the oldest, lamest seo tactics.
Umm lamest seo tactics? Well a true game player would see that there is some validity in having a URL name that is related to your subject matter.
>The reason why the results are so poor is imo due to the crawling issues. A big site with 50,000 pages will be lucky to get 2,000 listed, meanwhile Google can spider and index an entire
See related point below and a previous note made here [webmasterworld.com...]
It also should means smaller dedicated sites will be able to rank alongside the SUPER MIND BLOWING large sites that "others" think are the only ones that should exist and get hits.
>Who is in charge over there?
Someone who knows what new information is and how to index it. Spam reports are taken seriously at MSN as anywhere else.
[edited by: stinkfoot at 1:49 pm (utc) on May 26, 2006]
| 1:44 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"Umm lamest seo tactics? Well a true game player would see that there is some validity in having a URL name that is related to your subject matter."
Having a domain related to your subject matter makes sense. Even though blue-widgets-blue-widget.blue-widgets.com/bluewidgets is overkill, MSN likes it!
"Someone who knows what new information is and how to index it. Spam reports are taken seriously at MSN as anywhere else. "
MSN has serious spidering issues and abilities to keep index pages listed. There are only so many SPAM reports we can run. It should not be our job to show them right and wrong.
| 2:02 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
>Even though blue-widgets-blue-widget.blue-widgets.com/bluewidgets is overkill, MSN likes it
Ok that is a bit overkill ... there should be limits to it I admit.
>It should not be our job to show them right and wrong.
Agree but, technology is not infalible and never will be. There are issues with many search engines and how do you think the owners / writers get to know about them? Yup .. us ... it is just the way it is.
| 2:32 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Agreed that we do have a responsibility to inform of SPAM.
However, MSN should be able to catch most of this SPAM.
If Honda was making cars where the wheels kept falling off...do you think they would know about it? Or would they have to rely on the car buyers to let them know.
|Bean Coffee Shop|
| 2:45 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
What I am seeing is that the update seems to be a "regional" update. We have kept our rankings for searches done on msn.ca but on msn.com we have dropped dramatically. For "coffee shop" we were #1 on msn.com and now we are on the bottom of page 13. But for msn.ca (still searching the entire web) we are still #1.
| 2:56 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Keyword rich domains, spammy content, non authority sites listed in the SERP's for my industry. Somehow I doubt MS will be keeping these results, agree with OP give it a few days to let the results settle...
| 3:20 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
check out the keyword "<snip>", have a look at the blogspot results,
All 3 sites redirect to other domains, good one MSN
hmmmm dont think this will stay
[edited by: Receptional at 9:16 am (utc) on May 27, 2006]
[edit reason] Please find a way to make points without specifics [/edit]
| 3:40 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
That is a generic type of term though.
My niche I have not seen much change but I have always ranked good with MSN.
One thing, MSN is good about looking at a theme of a site and ranking relevant content about the theme.
As far as not getting your whole site indexed, that is ok. Keeps the index size down which really makes it easier for msnbot to crawl faster. Come on, how many people really look at more than 20 pages of a website anyways? If you have 20,000 pages I am sure there are only about 100 pages with the real meat and bones of your website. As long as those 100 are indexed and rank well for keywords who cares about the other 19,900
Its not always about the "size" its about relevancy and to be honest MSN search is 10 times better than the google mess right now....
[edited by: Receptional at 9:17 am (utc) on May 27, 2006]
| 5:43 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The SERPS we monitor are really poor. All the competetive terms are cluttered with SPAM.
| 7:00 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|loans is a generic type of term though |
Broad terms are just as important as longer phrases. If anything, the single-word searches should be cleaner than the longer, obscure phrases, assuming they do any manual testing, and I am pretty sure they are working on that.
Generic or not, the blogspot spam and other subdomain spam need to be gone.
| 7:19 pm on May 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I believe this update is to bring most of the spam to the top to see it. I too see all the spam but it is intentional for the purpose of testing as they turn filters on to see what it removes and what it doesn't. Best way I see to test a filter as it is impossible to replicate all the different ways to spam why not use the spam sites as a tool to see the different effects of each filter. I have full confidance you will see the serps return with less spam present... I went from page 1 to 4 on a single key word that is targeted by spam. Most of the other searches 2 3 words are ok due to the absense of spam.
| This 240 message thread spans 8 pages: < < 240 ( 1  3 4 5 6 7 8 ) > > |