homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 888 message thread spans 30 pages: < < 888 ( 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 [30]     
Google Updates and SERP Changes - Apr 2012

 4:34 am on Apr 1, 2012 (gmt 0)

< continued from: [webmasterworld.com...] >

Going, going, GONE!
After over 10 years of consistently ranking between position #1 and #3 on page one for a single four letter word search term, the month of March (starting on the 10th) has resulted in falling to below the fold, then to page 2, then page 3 and today I have been completely removed for that term.

In place is nothing but garbage. Branding obviously has lost traction. I'm thinking whatever they have done is meant to stick. I checked to see if I had been over optimized for the term, but with a mere 4 occurrences on my page and my need to use that term to describe my product, I really don't know what they want from us anymore...

The effect of lost traffic has set off all the "Big Traffic change for URL" warnings and the anayltics charts have nose dived. Anyone else seeing this type of situation on their long established sites?

Lost income from March updates is just about $1000 / week.

I'd almost guess that Google is just removing older authority sites in favor of nothing but news articles and blogs.

[edited by: tedster at 4:54 am (utc) on Apr 1, 2012]



 3:06 am on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

Today for the first time I saw Pinterest pin ranking in top ten for a very popular two word keyphrase. The pin has no description just an image caption.


 3:55 am on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

Squidoo, Tumblr, infoplease, hubpages, and even photobucket have all taken over the SERPs for my keywords. Also, they still have a love for blogs for whatever reason.


 4:23 am on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

Seeing sites in the 2 spot that are junk for all searches. Appears google wants to flush out more spam. I think that is some of what this update is about letting the junk float so it's easier to find.

Our traffic is strong but it's wrong. We are getting the wrong visitors due to semantic issues but it tightens up a little each day.

I looked at my old industry this weekend. I'd posted about it before. The companies that engaged in the blog spam got obliterated. They're not even on the first 3 pages after being first for years. It's not perfect but they have hit the target in some cases.


 12:00 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

@scotts - I'll agree that they finally seem to have hit some obvious violators. One particularly blatant SEO firm popped up a freebie site up about a year or two ago. The sites is nothing page after page of thin content surrounded by ads. It has stayed within two positions of my paid site for quite some time and done a little damage to my sales, but it's now nowhere to be seen. The question is, how long will it take these "SEO over-optimizers" to adjust to the new algo and return. (this is where a business registration program might help)

Saturday showed some late improvement in sales conversions and we had the best Sunday in a month.
It still needs some minor tuning, but for the most part (in my niche at least) things are looking better.
Knock on wood...

menntarra 34

 12:19 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

i want to ask all of you on this:
Let's say i have a webpage about ekectronic products. I want to rank well for these products. Do you think the following will affect the SERPS:
Which is better if i want to rank for "Samsung LE19D450G1W Television":

title tag just saying the product name:
"Samsung LE19D450G1W Television"
"cheap reliable Samsung LE19D450G1W Television"

Will any of the two is better than the other. Is it better to just use the shorter, or it does not have any effect on SERPS at all? What do you think? And what are your experiences about this?


 12:25 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

Labour Day around the world

Is it anywhere else other than the USA today?


 12:26 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

If I'm pandalized (last year) but not penguinized on 24th, is it clever to conclude that pandalization was only because of poor content in their view, not because of OOP or other webspam stuff? What do you think? Thanks.


 12:29 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

Labor day is the first Monday in September in the USA.


 12:41 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

Is it anywhere else other than the USA today?

USA is the World. The rest of us are aliens!


 1:04 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

Labor day is the first Monday in September in the USA.

So what is today? It's others who have posted it, not me.


 1:06 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

Is it (Labor Day) anywhere else other than the USA today?

I would suggest doing a Google search, but you'd probably just get results offering cheap labor.


 1:16 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

I was looking through some search terms today (quite competitive) and on the 3rd page I found an old website of mine, so old I forgot I had it, LOL. Super small and ugly, nothing useful on it and when I checked the logs the last time it was updated was in 2007 - hahaha...

Google, You Fail!


 1:16 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

"Labor day is the first Monday in September in the USA" true.
"Labour Day around the world"
He means probably the 1st of May around the world, in the UK is next monday.


 1:18 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

April 30th in the USA is just April 30th. I believe it is Labor Day....in Mexico.

@menntarra 34 - I'd personally go with the first one.
Too much hyperbole in the second. Might just explain it's qualities in the product description.

Beware though, mods don't like specific examples.


 1:45 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

I was looking through some search terms today (quite competitive) and on the 3rd page I found an old website of mine, so old I forgot I had it, LOL. Super small and ugly, nothing useful on it and when I checked the logs the last time it was updated was in 2007 - hahaha...

Yeah a site of mine that I haven't touched since 2005 is suddenly ranking for some phrases. I forgot the cpanel password and just today sent the host a request to reset. On one hand, it's horrible to see these kind of results, but it's the mess Google has made. On the other hand, it's an opportunity to revive the site.


 2:25 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

It's known as International Workers' Day, May Day, and Labour Day. Just read the "International Workers' Day article on Wikipedia. It's celebrated in 80 countries. It isn't a public holiday in all of those, but it is a holiday in most of Asia, parts of Europe, and all of South America.


 3:23 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

First post for me on here. UK business with dot.co.uk domain promoting a service to UK homeowners and businesses. Therefore I'm concerned only with Google's dot.co.uk serps. No direct sales from the site so no product pages or carts. I have about 220 pages which are content text) rich, including many self-penned articles and self-compiled directories which link out to services related to, and complimentary to, our own. We've been on page one or high on page two for our main two-word keyphrase since 2004 and many of our internal pages performed extremely well as landing pages for diverse search phrases.

After looking at the backlink data of a couple of commercial sites that ranked ahead of us I started a backlink campaign in February last year, one day a week maximum. This seemed to work really well and I saw an uplift in traffic of 20%at the beginning of May and a further 17% uplift at the beginning of August. We started our usual Christmas decline in traffic at the end of November and saw the usual upward spike of recovery in early January. Then our traffic slumped on January 14th and fell off a cliff on March 22nd. The last 30 days have been 60% down on last year's peak due largely to dropping from page two to (at it's worst this weekend) the bottom of page seven.

The competitors' sites I mentioned above have remained blithely unaffected and have been firmly lodged on page one throughout. I have checked their backlink profiles again and they seem very similar to mine with links from directories and blogs and other sites that they own. So I don't think my backlinks are causing the problem. I built them myself manually and have never subscribed to any kind of a scheme. But what I do notice about these sites (and all the commercial sites that newly out-rank me) is the sparcity of content spread across quite a small total number of site pages.

I can say with my hand on my heart that my site has far more useful content than any one of the commercial sites outranking it and deserves to be on page one (as it is on Bing). So why is it failing? Well, I thought about it and concluded that (maybe) the more content you have, the easier it is to do something that might appear spammy - or to put it another way, the less content you have, the easier it is for an algo to make the filter/no-filter decision.

In any event there were (and are) pressing reasons why I felt sitting back and waiting wasn't an option (rent, groceries, beer...). So I went to Webmaster Tools and tried to look at things with fresh eyes. Crucially I paid more attention to Content Keywords than I normally do. Here I noticed that there was a heavy imbalance towards the two words of my main keyphrase as follows:
<Main keyword 2> 7200 incidences;
<Main keyword 1> 6200;
<Other word 1> 1000;
<Other word 2> 1000;
<Keyword closely related to Main keyword 2> 900.

Presented in this format it does look quite spammy, but this was not an intentional target of mine, it was simply the result of a "reasonable" level of intelligent SEO applied over a very long period of time on a page-by-page basis. Focussing on the page-at-hand stopped me from having a proper bird's-eye overview. So I've reverted to basics and conducted a full site review with the object of removing incidences of the the two main keywords unless they are absolutely necessary. In particular I found a lot of usage in my navigation anchor text which could be removed without affecting usability. I've also removed single repeats in meta-tags (previously considered acceptable, I believe) and have begun to re-write text to reduce the incidence of the keyphrase without degrading the meaning of the text-at-hand. I'm lucky in as much as my "closely related keyword" in the list above is very useful in achieving that.

My aim is to bring down <keyword 1> and <keyword 2> to about 3000 incidences each. At the same time to increase <closely related keyword> to about 2000 incidences, hence giving my Content Keywords a "smoother curve".

What is quite strange is the feeling that I'm using SEO thinking and methodology to de-optimise my site. I'm hopeful that when I hit the right balance of optimisation and stop triggering the optimisation filter, my content will take my site back to where it belongs.


 3:49 pm on Apr 30, 2012 (gmt 0)

Welcome to WebmasterWorld themaninthejar, well thought out first post :)

< continued here: [webmasterworld.com...] >

[edited by: tedster at 3:44 am (utc) on May 9, 2012]

This 888 message thread spans 30 pages: < < 888 ( 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 [30]
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved