kevsta
msg:3868984 | 6:43 pm on Mar 12, 2009 (gmt 0) |
this does sound a bit wierd. presumably all your IBL's also have your kws in them as they're in the domain name? how does it perform in the SERP for your other business terms?
|
internetheaven
msg:3869098 | 8:39 pm on Mar 12, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| this does sound a bit wierd. presumably all your IBL's also have your kws in them as they're in the domain name? |
|
I get linked to by "our company name", "www.ourcompanyname.co.uk", "OurCompanyName.co.uk" and sometimes things like "what we are selling". It's quite natural backlinking (unlike fake natural link building if you know what I mean!). | how does it perform in the SERP for your other business terms? |
|
I think very well considering the market we are in. A one year old site against companies that are decades old with a stranglehold on newspapers, authority sites and hundreds of affiliates. To rank as we do is quite pleasing! It's just our own name which we should be number 1 for and should have been such within the first three months looking at the other stuff ranking there!
|
conor
msg:3869269 | 12:51 am on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0) |
Are you talking about your rankings in the .com index - if so its probably due to your .co.uk domain and if you have a UK IP . If you need to rank in the main index the quick fix could be switching to a US IP
|
jhnrang
msg:3869363 | 4:23 am on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0) |
I once had same problem. My personal site with 3 words in it was not ranking in top 10 even for "mypersonalsite". What I did was build few more links specifically to the home-page and all is well after 3/4 months.
|
internetheaven
msg:3869461 | 8:06 am on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| Are you talking about your rankings in the .com index - if so its probably due to your .co.uk domain and if you have a UK IP . If you need to rank in the main index the quick fix could be switching to a US IP |
|
I have a .co.uk and a UK IP address and am talking about rankings on Google .co.uk Thanks
|
tedster
msg:3869481 | 8:29 am on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0) |
It's still not necessarily a penalty, you're just being outranked. If you are not #1 for a search that includes the .tld - that could be a sign of a penalty.
|
internetheaven
msg:3869497 | 8:55 am on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| It's still not necessarily a penalty, you're just being outranked. If you are not #1 for a search that includes the .tld - that could be a sign of a penalty. |
|
I rank No.1 including TLD, and as you can see, there seems to be no obvious reason as to why I'm third instead of first. Surely AGE on it's own cannot trump such a backlink/PR difference?
|
tedster
msg:3869528 | 9:59 am on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0) |
Something is. Age is one factor, the semantic factors for the generic words in your domain/company name could be another. There also may be some domain level 301 redirects helping to boost the dot-com domains. The number of backlinks can also be pushed aside by the power of a few backlinks from excellent sources. So again, I do not think this is evidence of a penalty. I understand why you wish the rankings weren't this way right now, but they are.
|
internetheaven
msg:3869560 | 10:49 am on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| The number of backlinks can also be pushed aside by the power of a few backlinks from excellent sources. |
|
I completely agree ... but I don't see that happening here. I realise that the Yahoo backlinks tool is not perfect but if you look at my original post: Position 2: inner page (www.example.com/1/file)
keywords in file name
0 external links
1 internal link
PR0 |
|
That ranks above: root page (www.example.co.uk)
keywords in the domain name
608 external backlinks
621 internal backlinks
PR3 ?
|
kevsta
msg:3869566 | 11:03 am on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0) |
..my first thoughts were along the lines of Tedster's but I must say yes, to me that looks a bit suspect, especially as every single link you have, will have some combination of your KWs in it, along with an exact match domain. i'd actually quite like a look at this one.
|
tedster
msg:3869567 | 11:34 am on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0) |
How many total results are there for that particular search?
|
internetheaven
msg:3869608 | 12:58 pm on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| How many total results are there for that particular search? |
|
For "our company name" (without quotes) - 356,000,000 and we rank 3rd. For "our company name" (with quotes) - 96,300 and the top ten is exactly the same as for without quotes. For "ourcompanyname" (without quotes) - 106,000 and we rank 1st. And none of the top ten that appear for "our company name" appear in the top ten for "ourcompanyname". This is the most confusing this I've ever come across. No sign of a penalty anywhere else, and the stuff ranking above us couldn't be further from "better".
|
internetheaven
msg:3870172 | 6:33 am on Mar 14, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| I once had same problem. My personal site with 3 words in it was not ranking in top 10 even for "mypersonalsite". What I did was build few more links specifically to the home-page and all is well after 3/4 months. |
|
Not sure if you read my original post. I have 600+ backlinks. They have less than 10 between them.
|
kevsta
msg:3870258 | 12:33 pm on Mar 14, 2009 (gmt 0) |
so assuming for discussion purposes that you are just being outranked, what's the quality of their links like as compared to yours? do they just have one or two superpowerful links as opposed to lots of low quality your side? im thinking likely not, but just checking.
|
internetheaven
msg:3870260 | 12:46 pm on Mar 14, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| do they just have one or two superpowerful links as opposed to lots of low quality your side? |
|
#2 has no external backlinks according to Yahoo, and no Pagerank according to Google which would suggest Yahoo is right because the page is quite old. As for #1 - what kind of 3 links could outway 600+? Those links are from prominent sites too such as Reuters, Yahoo, PRWeb, BOTW etc. etc. Maybe a home page link from Google, Dmoz and No.10 Downing streets home page, but it doesn't have those.
|
|
