Robert_Charlton - 7:04 am on Oct 2, 2012 (gmt 0)
...There are samples emerging now on some trusted sources, that demonstrate Google distinguishing between the REAL business name, which it likes , from that of a site with a service it tries to provide purely for ranking purposes.
I'd say one clear factor in this update is that distinguishment.
Whitey... I think in general that you're right. There are also some specific examples that have been posted which show that some "churn and burn" type spam for various brand name knockoff sites, etc, appears still to be ranking.
Mod's note: We've got no choice but to delete those specific examples. As those familiar with this forum know, we don't allow specific search terms, domain names, or information to lead to specific sites.
Generally, when such examples have been explored, they aren't reflective of the algo as a whole, but are examples of what rankings multiple hacked sites pointing at throw-away domains can still achieve.
Hard to say whether they show that Google has an ongoing weakness with regard to EMDs, or simply whether the spammers using them have a large inventory of EMDs on hand. I don't feel they're representative of the serps as a whole, but some would like us to think so... perhaps to heighten a sense of injustice when a thin but "clean" EMD gets nuked and this overt spam appears to be flourishing.
In sites I monitor wh;ich have EMDs but where a lot of work has been put into the content and the linking has been clean, I've seen no drops. In some cases, I've seen the results improve. YMMV.