Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

Google results - text below the title - how important?

and how does G decide where to pull it from

         

jimmydubs

3:09 pm on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I know this text is supposed to be an excerpt from the returned results page with query terms in bold. However, I've noticed 2 weird things about this on competitor pages.

Firstly, one competitive url (which appears 2 places above mine on a key search term) has "text below the title" which is clearly derived partly from the meta description and partly from real text on the page. Both parts contain the same key phrase (ie. blue widgets....blue widgets) which means that the term is bolded twice in the results. As this is the only (honestly) key difference in our two pages (for this particular phrase) I'm guessing this is the reason he ranks higher in the results. But how does G decide where to pull this excerpt from? I see some pages where it is identical to the meta description, and some where it is pulled word for word from real content on the page itself, but this is the first time I've seen a bit of both.

Secondly, there's another competitive page which is returned higher than mine. However, the Google results return no "text below the title" whatsoever, despite the fact that there is a decent meta description in place. Why would this be? I think I know why this page ranks higher than mine (keyword appears in the URL) but I'm puzzled as to why Google gives no description whatsoever.

Any ideas?

Mr_Muff

3:39 pm on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Hi,

I noticed:

If site does contain meta description it does always appears in the result page. Anyway if the meta desc. is too short G usually adds a part of the page's text. If there is not a meta desc. it adds only a part of the page's text.

>>>> a part of the page's text

It seems that G finds a part of the page's text with the highest concentration for particular keyword and then puts the text behind the meta desc.

But do your own research... Maybe I am wrong...