| 1:38 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|Quotes are said by people and all news sources publish them on their websites. So, how can google consider that as duplicate content? |
Yes, but that doesn't mean that Google is making the same decision about WHICH sites are the best ones to show in the SERPs. That's more of a site-wide decision, and Panda is definitely a site-wide algorithm, not just a page-by-page algorithm.
If the pages are essentially the quotation with not much else for content, that's a high duplication level. And Panda really didn't like duplication very much, especially when it's there on almost every page.
| 2:12 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
As the guy above me said, the quotes alone will not flag panda its the overall page content.
If you just had some quotes and a few ads on the site with a not so unique site design, then there is a high amount of duplication.
If the site was constructed with a lot more content and offers a good user experience then this is literally curating the best quotes from the web and providing user value. This should pass the panda test.
add more value and dilute the copied quotes with unique content, images, videos, relevant stuff.
| 2:25 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|Panda is definitely a site-wide algorithm |
When you meant a site-wide algorithm, does it mean the percentage of pages flagged by Panda on the site?
I don't know what he more he can do? The sole purpose of the site is to present quotes and nothing else. Does that mean that he should be doomed for ever for the concept?
| 2:48 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
He can start by studying the sites that took over his rankings. I have no idea ahead of time what he will learn, but assume they are doing something that he isn't.
| 4:18 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|Does that mean that he should be doomed for ever for the concept? |
If that's all he's bringing to the table, then, frankly, yes. It's not a good business model, plain and simple.
| 8:08 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|It's not a good business model, plain and simple. |
Why does it have to be a good business model? Not everything on the web is about money (in principle, anyway!). If he's providing useful content to somebody searching for that kind of stuff then he should rank - and not be penalised because he hasn't padded that useful information with a load of useless text.
| 9:47 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I don't think that you understand the meaning of "business model" as used by netmeg or the rest of us in business..on or off the net..
| 10:01 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I don't think that you understand what I was saying at all.
I understand the meaning of business model to be a model by which a business runs.
Definition: a design of the operations of a business which focuses on how revenue will be generated
What I was saying is that not everyone who posts content on the internet is running a business. If there is some other definition of "business model" that doesn't refer to running a business then do please enlighten us.
| 10:13 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
So he is running this site which merely takes material posted elsewhere ( and which thus his intended "audience" do not need to come to him for ) and puts it on his page out of, as my mum would say "the goodness of his heart" ? <= scraper..
Or does he perchance have advertising of some sort around and betwixt it in order to pay the hosting and a few lattés ? <= scraper business ..
| 10:18 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I don't know I've not seen his site. I don't think Netmeg has though either, or you. Therefore we can't simply say "It's not a good business model, plain and simple." That's all I'm saying.
| 10:27 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|Therefore we can't simply say "It's not a good business model, plain and simple." |
We can..( based upon your original post ) ..you may not wish to..
But, I'm curious , how are you analysing a site without knowing its name,
|I don't know I've not seen his site |
did he not want to tell you the name ..you are clairvoyant ? or do you just avert your eyes from where the domain name is ,when looking at his stats and his serp position..or does he "redact" all of that out before he asks you questions or shows you figures, ..never clicked to see ?
This sounds like you do the SEO equivalent of inter continental psychic healing..but without even the photo of the "patient"..
| 10:49 am on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|His website publishes the quotes said by celebrities at one particular place so that they will be easily accessible to the users. It can be compared to the stock prices published by websites (of course, they have other news content along with the prices). All the websites publish the same prices, so that can't be duplicate content. |
btw ..the difference between "he and they" is staring you in the face in your own final paragraph..
They probably are getting hit to some degree by panda for dupe content ( the "posted everywhere" stock prices )..but as their dupe content also has their own unique content around it ..they only drop a few places, and no doubt the movement in their "niche" is amongst themselves..and some of them will have become by now "trusted" and cited elsewhere as having thoughtful analysis of the figures they show etc or good articles or editorial content or comment..
He on the other hand will have only what he is scraping ..so he will rank lower than the people he scrapes from ..and unless he adds unique content to what he has scraped ( as long as other scrapers with the same content add even a little other unique content ) he will be below them in serps too..
| 12:32 pm on Jun 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
If you're intending to compete against others for search engine position, to convince users AND Google that you are the trusted authority for this particular query, then you better have a business model, whether or not you're in it for profit. But if you don't like that term, then call it your operating plan or mode.
Taking content that is widely available already, on sites that may or may not provide more information than you do, and may or may not have a better user experience than you do, and that may or may not have better user engagement than you do, is a poor operating mode. One *might* make a success of it - but it's pretty unlikely, and if it does happen, it will be difficult to maintain.
In 2012 you need to be able to bring something better to the table - because for sure someone else will. Just having useful content won't cut it anymore. TONS of people have really useful content, and there's still only ten blue links on a page (if that).