Forum Moderators: open
Unit Price (USD)
1st URL $39.00
URLs #2-10 $24.00 each
URLs #11-100 $19.00 each
URLs #101-500 $12.00 each
[infospider.com...]
Same here. Until I see them stop rotating their results on refreshes where I only receive have the traffic I'm supposed to I think I will wait as well.
Their results are pure garbage now and I'm worried we have another Inktomi in the works.
They've just GOT to show me that they can deliver traffic the way they used to before I pay anything at all. Heck, I stopped the ritual re-submissions to AV a few months back, and that used to be on my high priority list!
I'm concerned that I hear the sound of taps, softly playing in the distance.
NOW
On a 2 word phrase there are 43,679,243 results.
It may take SOME TIME for them to TRASH all that competition. I'll wait.
Almost twice the price, for half the time as their pfi competitor. Spidering once a week compared to every 48 hours.
It just doesn't seem like the best approach for a search engine has less than 5% (and dropping) market share, and no distribution partners.
AltaVista R.I.P :(
The old thread:
[webmasterworld.com...]
I remeber what happened to Inktomi: you can have more pages indexed without paying a cent!
Search engines can not rely only to PFP: it is an added value for them to list quality sites.
Inktomi is in the strongest position because it has a captive audience- that is, people will continue to use MSN/AOL search regardless. FAST has Lycos.
AV will live and die by their search results. They are a search destination and if they do not provide, users will go elsewhere.
8 urls = 1 Yahoo listing and the Yahoo listing doesn't expire in six months (though clearly they will introduce a yearly fee when the market for new submissions bottoms out.)
IMHO it's also a way of listing poor quality content over good quality unpaid content. If a service accepts money it may be seen by some as dancing with the devil.
Unless gov and edu domains pay, and sites who are not suited to make revenue from advertising or sales (many reference sites etc), PFP MUST lead to decreased relevancy.
google draws away again. Lets hope they are a creative lot. and come up with the holy grail.. a revenue model that retains relevancy.
For example:
Will country specific domains still be 'filtered' so that a UK AV search returns .co.uk results on a preferential basis? If not, will ALL submitted pages, regardless of their domain/county, be in competition with one another in some huge international database. If so, how is that attractive to someone who pays for inclusion or the actual searcher who has to wade through it to find something of use?
Conversely, if country specific filtering is applied strictly, would the site that has content relevant to an international audience be compelled to have a .com domain (as well as their country specific one) and submit similar pages to achieve good coverage? While we all have our tactics for achieving this currently, if we are going to have to pay in the future the guidelines should be there BEFORE the scheme is launched.
AV has obviously put their strict anti-spam principles on a back burner - or will us poor mugs pay for submission only to be told 'we have been banned for spamming'?
I can't think of another 'advertising' medium (which seems to be the model for the pay for inclusion) where the offer is so untargeted.
Sorry for the near rant - I'll wait like many of the good people here.
So I'm not going to risk a single penny gambling that my banned site will get back in with any sort of high ranking.
Oh well, Google sends me 10X the traffic I ever got from AV. I'll save my dollars to invest in Google when they go public. One hand feeds the other, they say.
I had almost given up on AV on my private site and had less then 30 pages index and very poor ranking. Now, I have 720 pages indexed and great rankings - top 3 on most of my KW's :)
I can understand that logic a little - but what if the only thing the web site owner wanted was a guarantee of frequent respidering because his content changed frequently?
Someone at AV must be monitoring this thread with a fine tooth comb. As soon as I posted that last note I got an e-mail from infoSpider telling me that I had successfully registered the page in question.
I must have goofed..
Sorry about that, Gang!
Is anyone else going to try it?
Unlike Express Inclusion members, Basic Submit users do not receive any feedback or communication about their submissions, and will need to resubmit their sites pages whenever they are modified.
Sounds like their spiders won't be out actually crawling the web anymore. So, except for paid inclusion pages, and folks with the patience to "Basic Submit" (ie- free submit) their pages after EVERY change, AV is guaranteeing STALE results...
...just wondering if they are going to dump thos page they are crawling.... :o
Check out the whois.net on infospider.com, infospider.net, infospiders.com, etc
If so, we can say goodbye to AV. Relevance is why people use a Search Engine. SERPS where the returns are either paid submissions OR outdated results will lose end user customers very soon. That is unless a significant majority of sites register. Unlikely! The type of sites who register are usually selling something fairly aggressively, hence they can afford the fee...
