| 5:17 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Ok so it seems that many of those bombed on June 27th have returned, however, there are several of us who have gotten bombed today, July 27th.
| 5:22 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|I bet Google lost a lot of revenue over the last month and reverted back to pre June 27th. |
I'd guess that Google didn't lose a cent of revenue over this. It's not like the vacated slots we're empty.
Also, there are an unfortunate few of us, who have not seen any kind of recovery. So, I'm certain that they have not simply reverted back to pre June 27th code. It looks like they have fixed one of the bugs introduced on the 27th of June and completely missed one or more others.
I still see the screwy language and country partitioning, for example.
Interestingly, yesterday someone had posted a very polite question on the Matt Cutts blog, asking Matt if Google had changed their default behaviour for delivering targeted language and country results to users based on IP address. This morning, it looks like Matt deleted the question. Maybe they know they have a bug in this area also?
| 5:50 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
wow.. more and more of you just popping up.. amazing to see! I hope to join you all.. hopefully!
Great to solidify that this WAS googles mess-up since many webmasters have not touched their sites and have recovered - proof positive. Would be nice finally for the self-righteous posters on here and cutts logs to stop accusing us of black-hat and open their eyes.
Keep the great news coming everyone!
| 5:51 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Glad to hear everyone's comeback success, but this is strange...
My site dropped from Google on July 21st, then came back around the 24th to better than before...now, last night the Google dance continues and I am dropping again.
I am now seeing more link farms, duplicates and redirects from people who use another keyword laden domain name and the put up the "This page has moved" garbage, in order to hog the serps.
Are you telling me Google can't spot those?
I suspect the dance will continue...grab yer partner round n round...etc...etc...etc...
| 6:11 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
A few things to note with 3 sites (hosted in the US) experiencing issues in the last month - no changes made to any of them during this time:
- One dropped out on June 27th and has begun to make a comeback as of today through most datacenters. Still supplemental listings abound, but it has returned for its competitive search terms.
- Somewhere between June 27th and the middle of July, a second site went all supplemental for its site:www.domain.com search, but not its site:domain.com search. A 301 has long since been in place and I've had no non-www/www listings for some time. Its competitive search performance has remain unaffected.
- A third site of mine survived June 27th and went supplemental today - July 27th. This has mildly affected its standings in the search results for its competitive terms.
I don't intend to change anything - clearly this is an issue on Google's end.
| 6:49 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I do not know if its an issue on googles end necessarily. The % of sites effected are a small percentage. I have been monitoring 30 various random keywords and I really have not seen much change at all.
It makes me wonder if there is something in common about the sites that fell.
What program did you all use to make your webpages? Are they htm pages or php pages? Are all of you using meta tags?
| 7:07 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
One of my sites returned to normal sometime last night and the other remains "lost." I wonder if I should try to figure out what the difference is between the two or should I just wait and assume they're still fixing things?
| 7:09 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I can report that the web site I lost on June 27th is still lost.
Google did fix the supplemental problem about 2 weeks ago, but that did not bring the site back. Today the site is again showing supplemental pages first with the site command, pages that haven’t existed in over 2 years.
Also new today, is that 2 domain parkers that own similar domains are now on page one for my test keyword. They simply show ad’s and they are now “amazingly” on page one.
The only reason I can think of for this continuing problem with supplemental pages, is that perhaps the supplement segment of Google’s database is used in some part to achieve a trust rank. I think my site is lost from an incorrect trust rank caused by some bug with supplemental history.
| 7:41 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Lost on June 27, came back on 27 with some hours back at previous page 1 positions. Then disappeared again. for the same keywords. Horrible in terms of adsense earnings this July.
| 7:45 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I don't think it is related to meta tags or html authoring methods, but I could be wrong. I did some w3 validation tests (which means diddly squat) and Google has 47 errors to my 13.
I think they are just messing with the algo.
After more keyword testing, I am finding some REALLY bad results.
I do notice that the Google adwords-farm sites are doing very well. No content, just tons of Google ads and affiliate garbage.
Stay tuned, I for one expect to see more changes before this all settles out...
| 8:03 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Does anyone think it is possible that the sites who have not come back yet since June 27th may not be back yet simply because it is taking a day or two for Google to run the changes through and apply them to all the sites in the index?
I did notice a drop in my positions, some, just a little, since this morning and then back up again. For example, I returned today for the first time in the number 3 spot but then moved to 8 around mid day and now I am back to number 3. So there appears to still be at least some juggling going on.
So, I'm still a little nervous as to if it will all hold, but that aside, I am a very happy camper today indeed.
| 8:10 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
ontrack, I certainly hope that is the case as my biggest site that took a huge hit on June 27 has not returned. However I don't think that is the case. Across all of the data centers I know of I have not seen any change today for my site. If it was to recover I would have expected to see changes on some data centers by now. :(
| 8:21 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Things lost, things found. Same old, same old.
It may take another ten years to not have black helicopter threads every time it happens, but hopefully a few more people now understand Google is more inept than sinister.
| 8:58 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
OK here is something about the <META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOODP">
Just found out that my site not only return back in Google but in MSN as well in previous top positions since I put the above meta tag ,IMO that is not the reason for Google but for MSN it is because my ODP title and description was a real screwup.
Perhaps this post is not so related with the topic but maybe will help fellow webmasters with other search engines that use the ODP data(and support the new meta tag).
| 9:10 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Google was playing with the title and description for a while.
One thing I noted on my own site:
Pages with no meta tags have been bouncing all over the serps
Pages with meta tags, have been remaining steady in the serps
I am not listed in the ODP, so that is not a factor.
| 9:32 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
>> What program did you all use to make your webpages? Are they htm pages or php pages? Are all of you using meta tags? <<
Hand coded (clean) and tested to ensure no errors. A mix of htm and php pages. Meta tags are in use. Very standard stuff.
FYI, the first page described in my previous post that went supplemental on June 27th has been around for 7 years. The second site that went supplemental midway through this month is 8 years old. The last site that JUST went supplemental today is a little over a year old.
| 11:08 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
hmmmmmm.. good posts. Leading more and more to solidify that it was google not the webmasters.
Keep it coming folks..
| 11:57 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Just noticed today we have lost yet another 6 year old site to the site: / Supp problem - seems to have happened in the last 24 hours.
The site is a real estate site, PR3. Not related to the other sites we have. There is no pattern here and check of the DC's shows that it's in trouble on all of them. I guess the data push that was promised has finally arrived and we got pushed - again. There goes another 6 years of history until G gets it's act together. These are only our own sites so I don't have to explin this to anyone else. I would have to think of the heat that must be coming down the pipe at SEO companies right now, imagine trying to explain this to an angry client who's just dropped a packet on "improving their rankings" - Ouch.
| 6:21 am on Jul 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'd like to stress to the people seeing negative results in Google's index with regards to their old school, white hat web sites: just relax - this does not appear to be a permanent upset. I truly believe these issues tend to sort themselves out as has been the case again and again and again over the years.
After having one 7-year-old PR6 website go the wayside of supplemental lameness on June 27th, it returned today (for competitive terms - still supplemental) while another PR4 committed supplemental suicide (perhaps it was G-poisoned). At least they appear consistent.
Despite the extreme inconvenience, it's just not worth losing sleep over. So long as you can make ends meet, use this time to educate yourselves on other fine methods of web development, marketing and promotion. I don't subscribe to messing up a site with changes when your gut tells you there is nothing wrong with what you created.
Based on my historical experience, I fully expect my PR4 site to be back within the month (i.e. the importance of multi-site diversification). Google is suffering from something - perhaps growing pains.
| 8:17 am on Jul 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Good to hear that many of you have recovered your positions. I'm glad to say we haven't gone back to the mess we had before June 27th, so I guess whatever Google have done to fix your problems, it was not simply a return to the data they had before that date.
| 10:00 am on Jul 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
People who lost rank, are you getting far less hits from Googlebot? My Googlebot hits seem extremely low now.
| 10:21 am on Jul 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The hit pages on our site have been pushed back from position say 2-4 of the serps to 54+
Im obviously having some sort of penulty imposed on these pages Probably because the page title says its a "blue widgets" page, it has links to it saying "blue widgets" and has onpage content about "blue widgets" - I call a spade a spade but obviously to rank now google wants me it call a spade a shovel!
Its one thing losing position but it really gets under my skin when i see non relevent sh@t ranking ahead of us - now that grates.
Frankly, im leaving my pages as they are - F'ck Google, my users need to know what my pages are about and if google doesnt like the fact that a page clearly states what it is then so be it. I dont like the loss in traffic but im not buying adwords from them now, im buying from elsewhere - if im going to suffer, so can they. If other webmasters did the same google would stop F'cking with us.
| 11:33 am on Jul 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I can see what your saying. What sets this apart though is that the data for this one part of the algo has to have continually refreshed data at more and more frequent intervals..why?....youd think a keyword filter would just need the normal data set...why would they try to refresh it more and more frequently?..does this mean its tripping from a baseline that keeps changing?..its quite intriguing!
| 12:45 pm on Jul 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Googles unpredictable june 27 till July 27 up and down game is hitting well established sites badly. Sites with total junk are now having top spots as well as our own pages with minor importance whilst the top urls with odp and many other backlinks get thrown into the oblivion.
If Google would be smart and interested in true search quality they would simply have to hire some folks to work directly with leading publishers in order to keep the best results alive.
Right now, Google censorship is based on faulty engeneering and poor communication with publishers.
Would be great, to have more competition within this search business.
| 1:14 pm on Jul 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My affected site has also returned. However, on closer inspection I note that not all is back. I have quite a few seperate modules, like sub folders but not sub, and have noticed that some are missing from their respective SERPS. Is anyone else noticing anthing like this? Probably not as it just might be easier for me to spot from the way my site is set up. You may not notice missing SERPs so easily.
Still, I am not complaining too much as a 95% return is better than the pit that the site was in. :-)
Good luck everyone that hasn't returned yet. Sit tight and wait - mine took six months to return in last years episode of whatever google does.
| 3:36 pm on Jul 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
with such messing around like June 27, Bourbon etc updates Google is reducing it`s own revenues and user credibility at the same time.
An allmighty search institution should not only be based on buggy algos. At least not as long as they produce such junky results for so many elementary keywords.
| 12:42 am on Jul 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Just FYI, all 3 of the sites I described in my previous posts suffering from supplemental listings over the last month (beginning June 27th) regained their proper listing status under the site: command this evening. All 3 sites' homepages are listed as being cached as of July 27th.
Traffic appears to be back to normal (apart from the % decrease from the Google re-indexing of their image database).
With zero changes on my part throughout this event, if this doesn't indicate a Google hiccup, I don't know what does.
| 3:58 am on Jul 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
It's so strange in our industry the sites that are poping up in the top 2-3 pages and so much text and links on the page it makes me dizzy to look at.
Yet a couple of days ago it was the ones that had very very little copy and either 1-2 links inward and maybe a dropdown menu to go forward.
Could it be that they are running a randomizing program between multiple algos?
I do think there is something up with the locations as I see UK and Swedish sites popping up to the top when I'm clearly in the US using a google toolbar. However many US and local companies are showing up in their google adwords spots.
And probably the strangest was a site and the first few lines of code go like this
<title>TITLE CHANGED TO PROTECT THE QUESTIONABLE</title>
<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html dir="LTR" lang="en">
Anyone else see the problem with dual title tags .. the second was left empty
the ending of the page went like this
Not only the duplicate title , but also it doesn't even validate .. over 359 html errors. And their ssl certificate expired may of 2004 and even their copyright statement is for 2005.
Worse part is that they have not lost position .. not one bit through this whole thing. And they are running yahoo ads.
| 9:21 am on Jul 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I am very pleased for those of you who've recovered from the 27 June fiasco...
But none of our sites have recovered. Of six websites, via Google.com -
keywords - effect:
taj mahal - our site dropped from #1 to #8, and has wrong supplemental results
kew gardens - dropped from #3 to #700 or so
st paul's cathedral - dropped from #8 to #800 or so
virtual travel - dropped from #1 to #3
gardens guide - still at #1
It's particularly the Kew and St Paul's websites that I cannot figure out. Both are non-commercial, have excellent content, have many inbound links from quality sites, include AdSense, have many photos and good text, and include Flash virtual tours.
All the Flash content is also listed in Google-accessible HTML-only pages with pictures...
We moved our servers from the USA to the UK on 10 July, but that made no difference at all. The most recently cached pages for all sites are on the 25 - 27 July 06, so they are being regularly crawled.
Does anyone else with Flash content see a disastrous penalty since 27 June?
| 11:09 am on Jul 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I had one site drop to about 1/10 normal Google traffic on June 27 -- it was on page one for my main keyword but very bad ranking for all other keywords, it looked to me like a dup content penalty since no subpages showed up in a site search unless I hit "repeat search with omitted results." As of a couple of days ago it appears to have returned to the exact positions it had pre-27th. I have no explanation for this, just another datapoint.
| 12:44 pm on Jul 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I currently see a new data refresh that looks quite nice this morning. Filtering spam and text link buyers a little more it seems.
what do you guys GG watchers :) see?
| This 184 message thread spans 7 pages: < < 184 ( 1 2 3 4 5  7 ) > > |