Forum Moderators: open
The kids you'll have to wait about ten years for, but the missus...
Pre-Florida: #2
Post Florida: gone
Dec 08: back to #16 on www
Dec09: gone from www-in -2 - 3
Personally, i think the current www results are better than the current -in -2 -3, not just because we are gone again but becasue the www are more relavent..
The roller coast ride continues.........
I said that a business plan should not rely on benefits provided by a third party over whom the business has no influence.
I won't take this any further. It just makes no sense to me to factor in search engine traffic as a primary revenue source.
Are you saying a hungry man should not eat?
No, I'm saying a homeless man should not build a castle of sand.
[edited by: ronin at 10:24 pm (utc) on Dec. 9, 2003]
[edited by: tomasz at 10:27 pm (utc) on Dec. 9, 2003]
[edited by: GoogleGuy at 10:23 pm (utc) on Dec. 9, 2003]
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I have a horrible feeling my websites are about to be replaced by a generic monster site from www2 full of hotel listings pulled staight out of the standard international travel agency database called GDS (haven't you ever wondered why every big hotel site seems to have the same hotels on it?)
Not only have we been wiped from top 3 to < 30, but our main competitor, the biggest and best hotel inventory aggregator in the country has too. Their prices are much cheaper than you can book through the monster sites because they are negotiated direct at the hotels, so how is this helping Granny Smith who's planning her summer vacation?
The rest of the results are Yahoo directory pages, more monster booking sites and 5 star hotels with huge international websites who always offer rack rates on their sites. Nobody ever pays those! What a waste!
I also sent you a spam report of the worst offenders. Over all the major spam seems to be relegated to less competitive terms..
Remove all sites containing a link to a certain affiliate program and you'd remove 90% of the top 100 SERPS for many queries and maybe as much as 10 million pages from the index lol
[edited by: markus007 at 10:38 pm (utc) on Dec. 9, 2003]
It just makes no sense to me to factor in search engine traffic as a primary revenue source.
This makes *normal* business sense, but start-up businesses rely as much on wits and acumen, as capital, to grow.
I've always been conscious of the risks of major marketing coming from search engines, but we've worked hard, and used our wits, knowledge and research as much as any other company.
As such, good Internet positioning doesn't necessarily mean bad practice - in our case it means hard work and enterprise. I accept that Google doesn't owe us any favours - and if this is your point - I agree.
But nevertheless, a small business that works to get itself, in the real world for example, the best store front on the High Street, wouldn't be criticised for doing this.
I think that many small businesses on the Internet are simply saying - "we stayed within the rules, did the work, followed the guidelines and used our wits; but now our storefront has gone."
This could be taken as whining - perhaps it is, but it is a reasonable point to make. You shouldn't necessarily extend this to mean that someone believes Google owes them a living.
Well said....
It is very difficult to give you feed back about the results on –in without knowing what your criteria for a good result is what you are looking to achieve.
A good result for me of course is my site. But that aside if it is at all possible. May I be so bold as to ask you to define what you now consider is a good serp.
Please I do beg of you not to give generalisations I do understand you are attempting to give the best results possible, but how do you define that. What are you ideas on good results?
[edited by: Terrier at 10:42 pm (utc) on Dec. 9, 2003]
Powdork, I'm guessing your talking about your traditional search?NO! I was talking about my wife. Take my wife!;)
Yes, the normal (two word) search. Many more barely related directories. Also, there's lots of
www.result1.com
www.result1.com/info
search.result1.com/
search.result1/com?=6576
all the same domain on the same page. Pretend the second results are indented.
It is very difficult to give you feed back about the results on –in without knowing what your criteria for a good result is what you are looking to achieve.
I think the same basic rules still apply - there are problems with some commercial sites that I can't understand (including my own) - but, as a simple example, over-SEO might include worrying about 'bleeding' of PR to other sites due to out-linking.
My instinct is that this is one small part of the 'new-democratic' Filey algo.
jd
Filey must have made superscript very happy, since he was the first to notice the recent update. [webmasterworld.com...]
[edited by: Chndru at 10:55 pm (utc) on Dec. 9, 2003]
GoogleGuy said:
I'd be interested about feedback people have about www-in. If you want to send email to webmaster [at] google.com with the keyword "filey" (or fill out a spam report) with the keyword filey somewhere in the comments, I'd be happy to see any feedback (positive or negative) about www-in.google.com. Most users wouldn't notice much difference, but I'm happy to hear comments from folks.
This really worries me. I've looked at -in and it's again full of sites that are directories or link partners of ours but not sites related specifically to our area. Under pre-Florida our area was full of local content sites providing tourist information to prospective visitors. There are about 20 sites that provide varying amounts of info and we've all competed in harmony for the last few years. This is what people are looking for.
If they wanted another directory with one page of links and no content they wouldn't have come to Google. That's what they are supposed to provide - a list of local content sites with descriptive tages to allow people to pick and choose between the varios information sites.
-in does not give us that. They are regressing to Florida with not totally irrelevant sites but not the quality of sites that were there before - ours included which has been providing visitor information since 1995. Why should we not be there at what ever number? We are currently #3 for the name of our area which is also our site name.
If -in is implemented we disappear again (we were #2 before Florida).
What is Google trying to accomplish? It totally mystifies me. It's like going from a grade A engine to a grade C engine. No one can say it's totally not on topic but one look from someone who has followed these terms for 4 years can say that they are not 100%.
Posts read much easier without capitals - honestly. Just put it in plain English.
[edited by: superscript at 11:06 pm (utc) on Dec. 9, 2003]
Basic (rhetorical) question, when you take this trash out once, why doesn't it stay out?
==
Back now, I'll be sending something within twenty minutes.
I really don't understand why we keep disappearing however if you can have someone assess the whole problem, not just ours, then we will all be better for it.
Erm... from what I'm finding so far, I like it very much. Personal view on my serps only...
