Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: open
There are many who feel AV's downfall was their Black Monday/Wednesday? when the index turned bad for many webmasters. Often people (many of whom i respect) then argue that the reason for their downfall was the loss of webmaster's confidence, and people are bringing forward this argument regularly now.
I may be wrong, but my feeling is that AV's downfall was due to several factors, one of the least being webmaster confidence. The higher ones including the misplaced strategy of selling on by often deceptive means - users overwhelmed with commercials (often masquerading as "search services")on their front page and SERPS. eg "Buy "Singapore" on Ebay!"... Less and less of screen estate was being devoted to content!
The other one was just simply a ***sustained*** poorer performance of the SERPS when compared to up and comer Google which had a killer simple, and at the time, revolutionary USP for search engine services.
None of those factors apply to Google at present.
It was just getting harder for users to get want they wanted on AV. At the same time Google went for simplicity, and increasing user satisfaction, rather than bringing them in for something, and trying to spin/sell them on something else before providing what they came for.
It was the users that killed-off AV, not webmasters.
If that's true it makes a lot of the chest-beating in Forum 3 now fairly pointless.
The only thing I would add it this.....Your summation implies that Google became popular because webmasters made it so.....then do webmasters have the power to take Google's popularity away again?....possibly giving it to AV or ATW or INK?
I would like to hear your thoughts!
compare Google to Altavista in terms of search results and freshness.
I posted a "recent event" test a couple of days ago - a search for the latest virus to hit me - WORM_PALYH.A still got me zero results on Google a couple of minutes ago.
MSN, Altavista, AllTheWeb all have lots of results.
I guess i was one of the first to have a google search url on our website, way before Google actually paid us 3c a referred hit! I accept that webmasters do have some influence in guiding people to new destinations, especially search engines.But lets not over-estimate it. So does word of mouth from satisfied users, on-line discussion by USERS rather than webmasters, and off-line media.
Having got someone to your shop-door however you have to deliver for them to come back again. And provide a distinctly better service/products than competitors and maybe a better "feeling" (brand) too. That's what Google did, and that has less to do with webmasters, wom, and the off line media that got them there.
The Serps are so blatantly commercial. Category wide affiliates drown out the local and the topical sites. Quite a contrast to G's results in my cat. Not likely to win the hearts and minds of G users.
Oh well. Let sleeping dogs sleep.
Now, the experience is much improved, but still many things they could do to make it better.
3-5% of total SE traffic sounds about right on some of my sites.
Google are showing similar symptoms imho, having said that I think they are smart enough [and have acted upon] to pull back before the whole thing goes down the pan.
Not sure why you didn't get any, but I agree that freshness is helpful. cindysunc, it's a little-known fact that AV's choice of which pages to refresh is done by looking at what search results are clicked on. I'm guessing that your pages were crawled because you clicked on them.
If you want to optimize for AV (and I always encourage SEOs to diversify and to optimize for non-Google search engines ;) then you could keep updating your pages and clicking on them in search results to try different experiments about what works well for your site.
intk: 900 Per Day
ask: 200 Per day
alta: 45 per day
fast 75 Per day
I was very surprised with ask.com's traffic. And if they didnt stuff over 8 google adwords listings first, it would be even higher.