TheOptimizationIdiot - 5:42 am on Apr 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
Oh, but there's a simple, legal way (in California, anyway) to effectively do just that, and they do it all the time (source: my discussions with many, many tenants this has happened to over the years). At the end of a lease, you crank the rent up to double or even 10 times what it was. This effectively forces the tenant to leave. Then you quote an extremely high rent price to any tenants you don't want - because, legally, you've established that ridiculous price by pushing it on the former tenant. Later, when a desirable tenant shows up, you offer a lower price because, hey, none of those other potentials took the high one.
But, to keep going on the point, just for fun (lol)
Did the visitors care, or did the mall have enough brands there to keep the visitors happy and coming back? Did the visitors ask for the "unfairly removed" store by name at a high percentage or did most not even notice it was missing?
Think about those questions algorithmically.
You remove "Mom & Pop tv sales" from a resultset. Not may people search for it when it's missing after they search for "42 inch television", because it got traffic from the results based on placement, but wasn't a "brand" people look for. Basically, it got traffic because it was there, not because "people expected to see it and liked it".
You also remove, say Best Buy, from a resultset. But, when visitors search for "42 inch television" a "decent percentage" search again for "42 inch television at best buy", because it's a "brand" people look for in the results and Best Buy is not spending enough on advertising to be at the top of the results in the ads for "42 inch television" that month.
As a search/knowledge engine is it a better idea to remove Best Buy or "Mom & Pop tv sales" from the results if you want your visitors to keep coming back to you more often so you can show them more ads?
I know some people will say "Oh, yeah, they'd be better off removing Best Buy, because visitors'll click more ads that way." but if you're really looking to provide people with the answers they're looking for to keep them coming back, then including Best Buy in the results is a way better plan if it "goes missing" and visitors start to search for it specifically, imo.
At first, ehow sank along with the rest... then suddenly it figured out how to get back to the top despite being the very thing Google was trying to crush.
Anyway, whatever they actually call what I think is a spam pot you referred to, the point is when eWe'llStealYourContentAndNotEvenThinkTwiceAboutItOrEvenGiveYouALiveLinkFromIt disappeared from Google did enough visitors search for it by name or add the name to their query when searching again to indicate it was an "important result" to Google's visitors? I would guess since most people have no clue eWeStoleYourContentHaHaHaLOLWhatchaGonnaDo is the type of site it is they searched for it specifically more than we might think they did.