| 5:10 am on Jan 19, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I am seeing it, it could have been better, but Yahoo sometimes shows one thing at the beggining of an update, and ends up with a different set of results, so lets watch, shall we?
| 10:55 am on Jan 19, 2007 (gmt 0)|
The past few months, Yahoo! has stubbornly listed a meaningless internal page of mine at #2 while my homepage was at #18.
Now, there's a reversal. My homepage is #2 for my main keyword, the internal page at #18 and the #1 is an article scraped from my site, appearing on a geocities site!
The top ten is still full of amazon listings, library book listings and directories.
again....LOL!Sob!Sob! I don't know to laugh or cry at the serps...
| 7:55 pm on Jan 19, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I just moved to #1 for my main keyphrase -- hallelujah!
The title of the page is messed up, as described by the first poster -- darn it!
| 9:37 pm on Jan 19, 2007 (gmt 0)|
The lowercase thing is an epidemic now. Six of the first seven results on the first search I checked.
| 10:17 pm on Jan 19, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Is anyone from Yahoo reading these posts? Do they know about the problem? Do they care?
| 10:37 pm on Jan 19, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I have yet to see the title thing. The SERPs are horrid in the real where I operate.
I have seen as many as 6 pages from the same domain show in the top 20 for a one word query.
I have seen duplicate pages galore. I know of one site that was redesigned 2-3 years ago. It can still be found at www.example.com and www.example.com/newsite (the original testbed). These SERPs show both as distinct sites.
| 1:22 am on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I am not seeing any update...
| 3:12 am on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I see it. We did well on the last one but got hit hard this one. We made zero changes other than adding new content.
| 5:19 am on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I watch about 5 different sites and in all 5 sites i saw huge jumps in yahoo results today when I checked my serps. I had some rankings jump up over 100+ spots and almost all moved up atleast 25+
| 8:50 am on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Today it seems to be fine, though lately I have seen some strange responses over the past few weeks.
| 9:52 am on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Yahoo's traffic is so tiny now that this is hardly worth talking about.
| 10:52 am on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
> Yahoo's traffic is so tiny now that this is hardly worth talking about.
I do not agree. Any piece of traffic is good and if you rank fine it could be 8 - 10 % and usually good traffic ( shopping visitors),
My experience ( in the long period ) is that if you rank fine in Google, you will rank fine on Yahoo.......
| 12:38 pm on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Yahoo search blog has a weather report confirming the update.
We usually suffer a temporary drop in SERPs following an update only to come back in a week or two. This appears to be the first time we've actually increase in referrals from the start.
| 1:08 pm on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Yahoo's traffic is so tiny now that this is hardly worth talking about. |
Then why are you talking about it? :)
I have seen no indication that their traffic has decreased and every report I have seen from the various sources that monitor this stuff suggests they are about the same. We do 7 figures off Yahoo SERPS alone. Everyone understand that google is the King of traffic, but if you aren't making money in Yahoo/Overture, you aren't doing a great job at SEO/SEM. When I see posts that show their traffic is 95% google, I have to chuckle - all you are doing is admitting that youa re horrific at optimizing for Yahoo and msn which make up for at least 20% of all US traffic!
Yahoo is Yahoo. Some serps are good, others are poor. Overall, their services are improving but the search remains pretty much the same. If anyone cares to open a serious discusion purely about how they are scoring sites/the algo, I would surely participate. In this thread it will be "my site this or that" or Yahoo is spam/sucks...so not much to post other than tere have NOT been major changes, rather a few subtle changes, that appear to be more side effects than anything.
| 2:21 pm on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
>>This appears to be the first time we've actually increase in referrals from the start.
I just checked stats. Yahoo used to account for around 25% of our traffic, on Friday it was 38% - so we did see a good bump.
Now if I could only get some traffic from MSN - 0.5% :(
| 2:54 pm on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
One particular competitor site I watch has been rising steadilly in the ranks but their quantity of links are not great and the page/site content is pretty much unchanged.... I'm not getting a bead on this algo change. Thoughts?
| 4:37 pm on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Well, a lot of Yahoo, IME is aging of links... so, even if they're crappy ones, over time, they do give some value.
| 7:21 pm on Jan 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Yahoo's traffic is so tiny now that this is hardly worth talking about. |
Top ranks at Google for several kws but now Yahoo doesn't like our rich media site despite being listed since ages inside the Yahoo directory.
| 5:31 am on Jan 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I like Yahoo traffic and appreciate it. It seems the people who come to my sites from Yahoo participate more. They take time to read, discuss, etc.
Google, while supplying 80% of our traffic, delivers users looking for one thing and then leave.
| 6:49 am on Jan 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Yahoo has banned one of my sites...
Lo and behold, when you search for my sites name, you get a horrible smattering of spam sites and my site is nowhere to be found.
Truly. I'm shocked.
The site that was dropped is an incredible site: 5 years old, tens of thousands of active users, thousands of hand-written and hand edited articles, and a hand edited on target directory.
The top listing when you search for this site now now at Yahoo is mysitename.CA instead of .COM and it's a horrid spam directory/link farm.
I've sent multiple emails to Yahoo explaining my plight to no avail. The site has been dropped and been replaced by the most repugnant spam I've ever seen.
| 5:51 pm on Jan 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I have seen a 317% increase in yahoo traffic on the first day of the 'update'. This may seem like a good thing, however, I am waiting to see how it plays out over the coming few weeks.
My fear is we are witnessing the 'Yahoo Dance' where lower ranking sites in the Yahoo algorithm rise to the top as the new algorithm is rolled out across all sites. Top ranking sites fall in ranking first as they are the first sites to be evaluated under the algorithm update. Consequently, some sites may stay where they are now, (if they are better suited to the changes) while the majority of sites will drop back to where they ranked prior to the 'update' or to some other meaningless position.
This is the same affect we witness when google algorithm changes are rolled out - where top performing sites drop down rankings and lower ranked sites gain more visibility only for the majority of sites to go back to where they ranked previously after a couple of weeks.
All extra traffic is welcomed and I have noticed several of the yahoo visitors bookmarking my site, so hopefully this will bring me more repeat visitors. However, I do fear it is only short term while they roll out their changes and eventually the full index will have undergone the alorithm update and once again settle back into their 'organic' rank positions.
[edited by: Ganceann at 5:54 pm (utc) on Jan. 21, 2007]
| 6:03 pm on Jan 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
how do you identify yahoo referrals who have book marked your site?
I imagine it can be done, but can you say how you do this?
| 6:11 pm on Jan 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
clicktracking and referrer logfiles would should who the referrer was and when they bookmarked the page.
| 7:07 pm on Jan 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
no updates here...
| 7:20 pm on Jan 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|and a hand edited on target directory |
This might be what has done it. I seen it about a month ago across the board. Do you list websites, or companies with address and information, and do you 'appreciate' or require a link back?
| 11:03 pm on Jan 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I saw a huge jump with my sites which list for some pretty competative terms.
| 3:00 pm on Jan 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing the all-lowercase thing a lot. That really sucks.
I'm also seeing Yahoo! displaying the wrong "local search listing" now, under the description part of every listing of our client's homepage (which really sucks because that client is a huge industry leader whose homepage shows up for just about every industry keyphrase you could think of).
It looks like this:
Red Widget Consortium
Lots of talk about red widgets and companies that make them.
<< Johnny's Widgets >>
I'll admit they do list that site on their site but, then again, they list ALL the red widget sites and that particular local listing shouldn't have any logical reason to be there over any others. Why wouldn't Y just display the local search listing that MATCHES the site they're results listing?
| 3:27 pm on Jan 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Anyone have additional thoughts on the aging or old links concept. For instance, did you notice that sites with many new links just fell from the ranks?
| 3:56 am on Jan 23, 2007 (gmt 0)|
With yahoo it is really hard to tell what is true results and what is paid results since they mix the paid ones in with the natural results.
| This 53 message thread spans 2 pages: 53 (  2 ) > > |