Leosghost - 3:25 pm on Jun 10, 2011 (gmt 0)
Definitely is not to designed to "push" one towards adwords, I launched ( if one can say "launched" for a one page site ;-) a single page site , 7 letter.com KW1,KW2 ..both KWs with about 500 mill results for each, and thus nearly 500 mill for the combination.
IT / web sector , specialised services ..went live about 3 months prior to Panda..in at page 2 for each word ..and mid page one for the two together ) ( eleven to twelve slot .so a click through to page two of serps showed it well ) ..I would have expected to have to buy adwords for it ( there are a lot of others buying on these words and the "composite" )for it to do better.. from there ( had no intention of doing so however )..it has moved up slowly during Panda ..
( although , and this is intriguing, when the total results number returned for KW1,KW2 is slightly lower, say 480.000,000 it moves down a couple of spots,..( Google seems to cycle results at around 12 hour intervals,specially since Panda..IMO A/B testing .. total results returned can vary by 5 to 20 mill ) two days ago the returned results started to stabilise near the high end 500 mill..and it went to #1..
Page has around 200 words ..very tight on page SEO..one inbound link from another site I have ( aged since around Y2K ) but whose subject is not connected ( I just use it as a "boost" ) ..I have no idea if anyone else has linked to it as the backlinks commands are unreliable and have been so for years now ..
There are a few sites on the net that are far better indicators of backlinks than any of the SE's.
This is a "money terms"..site ..IMO if panda was about forcing one to buy ads , I'd still be on page 2..There are ads being bought on these KWs..
Similar situation on other sites,old and new, I'm seeing no forcing me to get out the credit card in order to be visible ..may come one day in the future ( although personally I doubt it )..Why sites are not "coming back" or moving ?
I think that
#1 If you don't make real genuine changes to the site that are not obviously just for ranking to drive visitors to click on your ads..the the algo is designed to say "probably MFA"..when the site finishes morphing we'll re-evaluate, but a moving target is moving "this way" to escape panda not evolving genuinely.
and #2 it is ressource intensive, so why would they burn CPU cycles to help MFA's and ad spammers climb back up ..for years Google have said they can see things and do things ..and just the mention of that has kept many in line ..and so they rarely actually needed to run certain parts of the algo ..
FUD has kept many site owners "clean"( er ) than they would have been ..
G has issued a thunderclap from on high with Panda , knocked down a lot of drecky sites..scared many others ..I think the scaring was as much in the intentions as were the thunderbolts.
I think the Panda algo can tell who is making solid attempts to shore up their foundations, and make solid sites..and who are just throwing over a tarp and painting it to look like roof tiles..the later are finding that the the wind and the rain are still coming through and it is cold.
A point on scrapers..yes some scrapers are still there and some have even moved up, no doubt at all Google will be working on this, but reading the threads here, and knowing some of the sites whose owners are complaining, even in this thread ( doesn't mean everyone..but they know who they are..as do some of us ) , and knowing that they are and have been using other peoples content and images etc for a long time and thus are IMO pure scrapers..
Google got some of the scraper part right, and it is a work in progress, the machine has to learn..a "genuine" site will be able to ride it out..and come back up ..one made only to get ad clicks or with other peoples content won't..because how do they replace thousands of pages of other folks stuff with their own, before they go bust..because now they know they cant just take it from elsewhere, the game is up.
How do they remake all their pages from ad ridden tricky click swamps to normal ad supported sites without looking and becoming virtually unrecognisable as the original site..layout changes like that, would do that to them..and their new revenue levels as non tricky wouldn't support the lifestyle they have become accustomed to by being ad swamps.
Why is Matt keeping it vague..because you don't show the picture until its finished ..especially not if the bad guys could see the direction its going and maybe the end point from the underpainting..
There is nothing it for Google, nor those of us who are not "tricky" if they bow to pressure and listen to the wailing..not all of which is innocent by any means.
And yes there are some "innocent bystander" sites, but some of the most vocal here and elsewhere,in the "G got it wrong, and G is killing, me and why doesn't G let me back up" are some of the least "innocent".