Perhaps a stupid question about these results

sincerely want to understand

[tommyleef]

My site without any major changes at all went from top 10 to number 123 and even as low as 200 during this update. 3 months ago those rankings would have been only a little worse than where we were...

I keep hearing people say this update is using an old deepcrawl. Yet, the cached version is a very recent one of my site.

I have 2 questions I sincerely ask:

1. Cached has nothing or little to do with these results, correct?

2. How can results that are using deepcrawls 3 months old be touted as a house-cleaning awesome update?

I love Google and know they rule...but going from top 10 to almost 200th has cost me over 20k this month in gross sales.

I know everyone says just wait...but that is awfully hard to do.

[mat]

Yes, it's hard, frustrating, baffling, tense, and all those things, but, Google aren't touting it as an awesome update, they appear to be saying that these are the foundations necessary for what they need to do.

Meanwhile, many things are in limbo/off picture - newer sites are being hit hardest - but waiting is all that can be done. Whilst waiting, consider AdWords, and anything else you can do to spread the burden. This seems trite, sorry, but it's being said day in and day out at present.

[tommyleef]

I know adwords work...I built my site that way at first...but this age of buying relevent results is disheartening.

Trust me, I'm a fighter and our company sky rocketed after hard work and taking care of customers. Still, this update is a hard blow!

I know what you mean about the 'foundation' comment. However, I see a lot of folks defending this update and I'm like what planet are you guys from?

Thanks for the wise words...guess I'll go back to driving a Yugo and let Ford have the Navigator back... :(