| 4:09 pm on Apr 14, 2007 (gmt 0)|
The first thing I would look at is the variance on different days of the week. Do you have days that are more popular than others or do you see fairly constant traffic? Our sites have twice as much traffic on weekdays vs weekend days, an even spread accross the week would look odd to us.
The other thing I have to add is that Google varies it's algo quite often, if you have seen similar traffic for a long time then it could be that you are not 'suppressed', if you were truly penalised you would see a 90%+ drop in referrals for G. How do you fare in search positions? If you are regularly in the top 10 for non-obscure terms then I'd say you are doing OK, if you are regularly in positions 30 to 40 then there could well be an issue.
| 4:37 pm on Apr 14, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|I may be way off the mark here but I have a site that gets a bout 1000 visitors a day and about 350 a day from Google. |
It has always struck me that amount of traffic from Google over a prolonged time was very similar per day.
Turn it around: It strikes me that the amount of traffic from other sources of a prolonged period of time is very similar per day.
Think about it ;-).
| 6:47 am on Apr 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Not sure about the filter, but I do believe there's a system that does some sort of "rationing of traffic" by Google.
I've seen individual pages of my site go up and down in rankings to produce... almost identical total site traffic week after week (because daily traffic varies by day of the week, it's a good idea to track your rolling 7-day totals). It's as if some-body/thing at Google decided "this guy gets 500 weekly visitors, no more no less" and there you have it until your next "review".
| 7:10 am on Apr 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
loudspeaker, I have noticed the same thing, I stay around the same traffic, within a specific band pretty much year-round.
| 6:39 pm on Apr 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Ditto here. Travel site - logic dictates that traffic should fluctuate seasonally - it does not. Same pattern - week after week - consistent Mon-Fri - dipping on Sat and Sun.
Occasional shifts do occur - 10% up or down - but perhaps once or twice a year and independently of season. Last one happened Nov 2006. Throughout the years the site has been SEO'd, de-SEO'd, white-hatted, massaged, etc. - with little or no impact on the daily totals.
I have also been suspecting the existence of a "Google Organic Traffic Valve" - but for fear of public ridicule I have kept this conspiracy theory to myself.
My evidence: I follow a handful of benchmark search phrases such as "blue widgets in city" - where we have been #1 of 4mil for about 4 years. One day my intercom buzzes - "We're not #1 for "blah blah" anymore!" yells a frantic salesperson. I check my machine - still there. I check his - we're #7. Since then, this has been dozens of times for quite a few searches.
Yes I know - different datacentres offer differing results - but perhaps this is the reason why. Mayber this is the cause of the various "In & Out" or "950" penalties.
What if Google is handing out traffic in pre-determined rations based on some mystical "score" assigned to each site and there is nothing you can do about it? My theory - Google doesn't want anyone to receive so much traffic that they have no need for AdWords - this keeps everyone as a potential AdWord junkie.
| 7:41 pm on Apr 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
"but for fear of public ridicule"
...forgot about that a long time ago :)
| 7:56 pm on Apr 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I like these types of conspiracy theories :)
I doubt there really is a 'rationing' effect. All I do know is that traffic was consistent to one of my sites until it was linked to by a PR9 site. Since then, traffic to this site has trebled and has stayed pretty steady at the higher level.
Strangely though, the site's overall position in SERPs has remained much the same pre and post PR9 link. It does make you wonder. ;)
| 8:06 pm on Apr 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Yes I know - different datacentres offer differing results |
Sometimes, the same datacentre shows totally different results for identical queries done at the same time by two different people in the same house.
I understand different datacentres giving different sets of results, but always thought the results from a (specific) datacentre should be the same?
Confused (but that doesn't take much :))
| 9:13 pm on Apr 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
how are they supposed to be controlling your traffic?..its goes right through the day does it not? how are they supposed to gauge exact numbers balanced for all those websites out there through the whole day? Its not like they can say you get 5000 visits and then the traffic is stopped. If they did that it would be obvious.
| 9:31 pm on Apr 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
soapystar, that's a Googlesecret. If they told us how they did it, it wouldn't be a secret any more. :)
| 3:30 pm on Apr 18, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Sometimes, the same datacentre shows totally different results for identical queries done at the same time by two different people in the same house. |
Malachite - this is the first time I have heard something like this - it certainly sounds like a nifty way to "ration" traffic, along with the potential for some additional and more frightening experimentation on poor webmasters.
Uhhh....say, does that PR9 site have any more links for sale? If so, sticky me your Pay Pal info for a finder's fee of your choosing :)
| 5:43 pm on Apr 18, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|What if Google is handing out traffic in pre-determined rations based on some mystical "score" assigned to each site |
I've suspected something like this for a long time but I don't think the purpose is to ration traffic. There was a patent a couple of years ago discussing document scoring. Document score could dictate how often the document is returned and/or at what position it is returned. I think the only way to improve score is to increase the document's popularity.
Link to the patent [appft1.uspto.gov]
[edited by: encyclo at 1:56 am (utc) on April 24, 2007]
[edit reason] fixed side-scroll [/edit]
| 8:07 pm on Apr 18, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Personally, I don't see a conspiracy here, but rather a statistical reality. If you roll a die a thousand times a day, chances are the results will look similar every day, within a small range of statistical deviation. A large number of search results will yield a similar result as well.
| 9:03 pm on Apr 18, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Why is everybody only focusing on the Google number (350 visitors)? What about the also steady 650 from other traffic sources?
Let's rephrase sandpetra's first post:
|I may be way off the mark here but I have a site that gets a bout 1000 visitors a day and about 650 a day from other traffic sources. |
It has always struck me that amount of traffic from other traffic sources over a prolonged time was very similar per day.
I just wanted to ask if anyone else thought it strange and could it be the sign my site was being surpressed (ie by the number of referrals it gets from other traffic sources) becuase of some dubious links, poor structure etc?
The site in Q is has solid rankings.
Is it just that the terms I focus on actually do recieve that number of clicks on average per day via other traffic sources or is it that that is how much traffic other traffic sources wants my site to get on a single day?
Using the same conspiracy theory logic, that would mean other traffic sources are also "rationing" traffic to the site.
| 12:23 am on Apr 19, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Thinking someone is conspiring to get you is now treatable with medication.
My traffic from G (and others) fluctuates little (4 years). G is always 92 to 96% of my traffic. Except for the two times I was penalized by G and then my percent and traffic dropped but that was a conspiracy of stupidity on my part.
| 12:50 am on Apr 19, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Just because youre paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you! :)
One thing i used to love about this forum was the conspiracy theories - something I know i've seen a lot less of in the last year or so.
Is it because we're getting wiser or scared to post something that brings riddicule (me excluded obviously) :)
| 4:59 pm on Apr 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I think you are just looking at it from the wrong angle. When traffic reaches a consistent maximum level, I look for ways to expand my reach to increase traffic.
| 5:50 pm on Apr 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Yes..if your traffic has remained at a consistent level for sometime...could it not be that you have hit the optimal level of traffic for your sector (your phrases/positions)...?
Are you continually serving new content and ways for people to interact with your site (for higher page views/stickiness)...?
One certainly cannot exclude the possibility that Google can control the flow from their end...!
| 9:52 pm on Apr 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Why is everybody only focusing on the Google number (350 visitors)? What about the also steady 650 from other traffic sources? |
Yep. I saw consistent referral patterns long before Google came along, back in the days when most of my previous site's traffic came from Infoseek, AltaVista, HotBot, etc. And when I look at my daily stats nowadays, the pattern of referrals from Google, Yahoo, and MSN doesn't change very much--the totals may go up and down somewhat, depending on the day of the week and the season, but the ratio is fairly constant. What's more, I can predict with near-certainty which of my pages will be in the top 10, and at any given time of year, I can make a pretty decent ballpark guess about the number of page views I'll get for an article about [widget airport bus] or [a certain island] or [a certain city's index page].
There's no conspiracy: It's just the way statistical patterns work. (And it's why, for example, airlines and hotels can predict seat or room inventory on any given day with surprising accuracy, and Wal-Mart or Target can schedule just-in-time deliveries of M&Ms, disposable diapers, or toaster ovens.)
| 11:16 pm on Apr 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I'll put on my tinfoil hat and add to the conspiracy. It does sometimes feel like there is a rationing of some sort.
Here's a scenario. I add a page a week to one of my sites. This site has consistently between 4,000 to 4,300 visitors a day. Each time I add a page of unique content I get more visitors coming in via that page. Sometimes it's only 20 more a month. If I hit it lucky, a new page will bring in 200-300 new visitors a month.
OK, some of the older pages may, over time, not be linked to directly form the home page, so they may drop in importance. But they still bring in some new visitors via Google.
However, over a year, my daily visitors are still only 4,000 to 4,300. So the question is, if I keep adding new content and attracting visitors with that new content, how come I don't increase my overall visitor number?
It is a funny one. I have often noticed that increases in overall referrals happen suddenly (over a period of a week or so). It's almost as if the site is getting an upgrade in allowable traffic numbers.
But in reality, I suspect it's something completely unconnected. ;)
| 12:35 am on Apr 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
On one of my websites - I pretty much know how many visitors to expect for each day of the week every week, and I am always right within 5%. For example, evey Monday I get x number of visitors, every Tuesday - y number etc.
It has been like that for over 2 months now.
| 12:45 am on Apr 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|It has been like that for over 2 months now. |
In my case, it's been more than 11 years, or since Larry Page and Sergey Brin were in junior high. :-)
| 7:43 am on Apr 23, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|In my case, it's been more than 11 years, or since Larry Page and Sergey Brin were in junior high. :-) |
your traffic hasn't increased in 11 years?
| 9:29 am on Apr 23, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I think Google organic search has much bigger issues on it's hands.
| 1:12 pm on Apr 23, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|your traffic hasn't increased in 11 years? |
It's increased greatly in 11 years, but the laws of statistical deviation haven't changed at all.
| 4:52 pm on Apr 23, 2007 (gmt 0)|
can you divulge what statistical analysis you have used to predict your growth to within 5% over 11 years?
Actually you seem to be saying different to the original poster. He said his numbers remain static. he suggests the numbers are so fixed its like hes only allowed that number before the tap is shut. However your saying your numbers have increased greatly. But that growth is within the limits of some expected figure. While what you are saying is not really the subject of thread, can you give an indication of how you make your projections?
| 5:49 pm on Apr 23, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Soapystar, the OP didn't give a timeline, so we have no idea what he meant by "prolonged." Nor do we know exactly what he meant by "very similar," but "very similar" (the OP's phrase) isn't the same as "static" (yours).
Suffice to say that, in my 11 years of experience, referrals from major sources (and quite a few minor ones that I track) seldom change dramatically and suddenly; except when a major search engine update occurs--and it's been a while since the monthly Google "dance"--the traffic on, say, an article about the Widgetville Subway or a Whatsit Cruise on the River Thingamajig will be will within a predictable range (which isn't to say that there may not be growth over time).
| 6:16 pm on Apr 23, 2007 (gmt 0)|
i meant the original poster to whom you replied, he said
|On one of my websites - I pretty much know how many visitors to expect for each day of the week every week, and I am always right within 5%. For example, evey Monday I get x number of visitors, every Tuesday - y number etc. |
It has been like that for over 2 months now.
so he said a time span of 2 months.
| 1:40 am on Apr 24, 2007 (gmt 0)|
"europeforvisitors" was just being a smart a**, as he/she does in many other posts.
Here is an example with some fixtional numbers, just to help out.
In the past 2 months:
Every Monday I get 100 visitors +-5%
Every Tuesday I get 150 visitors +-5%
Every Wednesday I get 300 visitors +-5%
Every Thursday I get 200 visitors +-5%
This website is by no means somehow day-of-the-week topic related and there is no logical reason for me to get 3 times more traffic on Wednesday than I do on Monday. It is regularly updated and it holds a stabile ranking.
| This 33 message thread spans 2 pages: 33 (  2 ) > > |