Forum Moderators: open
... eye-opener? ... i see a lot of plurals in Real Estate.
Hi Claus,
Hope you had a nice Christmas Holiday.
I think you know the answer and you are drip feeding bits of information. I'm also pretty sure that you are not the only one here who has been sitting with a clear and accurate insight into what Florida was all about.
You must all have had a real belly chuckle at some of the theories that we have been throwing around.
I think that the time has come to come clean and tell us all the solution to our conundrum. I think a few of us have found the final piece in the jigsaw but I'd like some of the seniors here to share a bit more. I respect the point of view that what you have was hard (l)earned and you don't want to give it away for free so here's a way to do it without laying it on a plate.
Give us some links on the general "theme" of what has changed. I know that Brett has written some interesting stuff.
Too much information is no information at all and too little is likely to mislead. I'm very concious of the fact that some of the theorising here has had us chasing our tales and I don't want to be guilty of perpetuating any of that sort of activity.
So go on Claus giz a clue and save us a couple of months of testing before we tell everyone anyway.
Best wishes
Sid
Yep, totally agree. Content has always been king and still is.
Suggest you check about 100 keyword phrases, see what content the web sites in the top ten SERP positions have and then determine if you still agree with your statement.
There's crap there!
Give us some links on the general "theme" of what has changed. I know that Brett has written some interesting stuff.
Yup, he has.
Actually looking at my previous paragraph it would probably incur a penalty because Google might think I'm trying to over optimize for real estate. So the only way to avoid this type of problem would be to avoid this natural writing style and really optimize the page to please Google. Google through it's efforts is penalizing the natural writers who seek to build content and rewards spammers who seek only to feed Google.
____
I have the exact same situation on a number of my travel sites also. Not only for condos, but for hotels, and even some cities, suites
It is a filter. The filter is in place in the "money cities" or "money searches" Give google a few more weeks and it will apply to just about any city that has reasonable search traffic.
Honestly, al this cow-towing to the great google gods steming abilities or other type of new search abilities for producing their results apears to me to be little more than overblown speculation or mis-guided thoughts.
IN MHO it's nothing more than a crude filter, and I don't believe SEO has anything to do with it at all.
If what we are seeing is Googles attempt at CIRCA or something like that than in short order they should be apearing # 1 for the search phrase "miserabe failure" and CIRCA should be re-named "Busted", which in my opinion sums up exactly what google now is.
They not a first class search engine anymore simply a third class stacked deck. You might as well be searching the ODP directory.
I can re-keyword just about any city that I operate in and attain a # 1 ranking for cityname resorts, but I cannot even apear in the first 600 for same cityname hotels. BS
That's a filter and nothing more.
That's a filter and nothing more.
Agree.
I have a web page that was getting thousands of hits/day
for Keyword1Keyword2 (ranked number one)
Then the filter started for money keywords and my hits went to zero from Google.
Strange though the page is still ranked number one for
"discount Keyword1Keyword2" but gets few hits.
Someone smarter than I will have to explain what the Googlers are up to.
It is a filter. The filter is in place in the "money cities" or "money searches"
I have to agree. There may be other factors as well, but the filter on two word travel destination searches is a too obvious reality in my areas of interest.
It may be a byproduct of some more complex algo, and not a simple "attack", but the bottom line is the same for me. Once I figured out what was being filtered and what was getting through, I had a workplan. So far it seems to be getting the results I need.
I still see no evidence of any OOP filter, or any sort of steming that wasnt present prior to florida. What I do see is dozens of "competitive terms" being hijacked in an attempt to force more competitive bidding wars - and thats a crock of BS.
Its time their arrogance slaps them in the face - I agree they are standing in quick-sand and if they dont wake up soon - they will lose too much ground and will not be able to recover. History is not on their side!
What do the other sites in those SERPs look like?
What do the other sites in those SERPs look like?Let me hazard a guess.
In other words, the standard post-florida crap searching for real estate in any city provides.
While I come back to see a lot of talk about semantics, etc., what I am actually observing indicates that an optimization penalty is at least partially responsible.
Please note that other factors are also in play, and the existence or observation of these other factors does not preclude this. However, I am open to other explanations for the results I am seeing. My goal is to try to ascertain the reasons for the shift in SERPs.
Some of my observations -
One site created several years ago was primarily optimized for keyword1 keyword2 keyword3. This particular keyword phrase was selected at the time because it was NOT very competitive (and thus an easy target), the site was also secondary optimized for more competitive phrases.
The first three words of the title were that exact phrase. Because the specific phrase selected was not very competitive, this site held the #1 spot for that search for several YEARS. It also held #1 for the much more competitive keywordA keywordB keyword2 keyword3 for the same period, as well as a Top-10 for the highly competitive keywordX keyword2 keyword3 search.
Now, keyword2 keyword3 is the "meat", keyword1, keywordA keywordB, and keywordX are all just geographic designators. All three searches have the same exact theme/sematics. The only difference is how competitive each search phrase is, and that the first (and least competitive) one is what the page was primarily optimized for.
The new results show a slight slip in the much more competitive keywordA keywordB keyword2 keyword3, but still Top-10. However, for the primary optimization phrase keyword1 keyword2 keyword3, that #1 listing dropped like a rock! The site has been knocked-down to around page 5. Of particular interest -
* None of any of the several pages of SERPs above it included all three keywords in their title, the first to do so was our site.
* The page that was heavily optimized for that phrase (the homepage) did not appear in the SERPs at all! Rather, two not as perfect a match sub-pages are now listed!
It is also worth noting that the phrase which we maintained Top-10 returns over 3/4 of a million results, and the one that we were optimized for and dropped like a rock returns not even 10% of that.
Another example, a directory site, previously was Top-10 for keyword1 keyword2 keywordA keyword4, as well as keyword1 keyword2 keywordB keyword4. Keyword1 Keyword2 were geographic designators and both appeared in title. As a directory, theme/semantics again similar for both searches. Difference was keywordB was more a "money" keyword, and was previously added to the title for a slight boost for that search.
New results, still Top-10 for first search, but disappeared for second search where more of keywords in title. Curious to see if removing that word from title will result in an increase in rankings, as previously had Top-10 even without it.
Now, recent experiment with optimizing with new algo -
Recent experiment, to increase rankings with new Google algo, has met with some success! This site was built to be SE-friendly, work had been done on linkage, but site not heavily optimized. Site was already doing quite well with some semi-relevant searches, due to new algo. Tweaked page contents and titles of a few select pages to target specific desired search phrases, based on what I figured G was looking for based on recent observations by myself and others. Waited patiently for site to be re-indexed. Success!
Was able to get Top-10 for two primary target phrases, site is also first RELEVANT listing for both searches. Seems there is a "sweet spot", still analyzing. However, appears am on the right track.
Am still examining results on secondary keywords, will update you on what I discover.
Either way, I don't think he'll find an answer for why one site fell and one didn't without looking at the sites around him.
As for litterature, Brett's 26 steps mentions adding a page of content each day, there's nothing new there. Doing so will ensure that your site accumulates a range of pages relevant for a lot of related search terms. Your traffic should not only be generated through the front page, that's one implication. Another is that the general value of your site is equal to the sum of sub-topics you cover within the topic, ie. sub-pages dedicated to specific keywords. That's what directories do, and also what "structured documents" (such as a thesis) do, it's a hierarchy of topical content, as in the "theme pyramids" article.
The "I'm not CNN" mantra from that article should be taken literally, as in "I'm not Real Estate". "Real Estate" is really just one keyword, or "topic", and not two - and searching one such "concept" will bring up topical results in the SERPS covering several meanings of the idea/concept/industry/word/whatever - unless you are actually "CNN", meaning, your company is equal to what is searched for. In the case of CNN, their backlinks and dmoz cat both indicate "news", as well as their front page which is similar to a news directory (do look at alt-text as well). CNN matches the topic of News as a general ressource, but BBC matches the keyword "news" better (query: "news" +news).
Sidenote, partly OT: Here's also a great post from pageoneresults on some of the structural elements of a page: Building the Perfect Page - Part I - The Basics [webmasterworld.com] - it's more about the building blocks of your page than the site (oops, did i say that..), but... okay, your pages make up your site, and relevant "sites" seem to be rewarded in some way (pages linking to many relevant subpages) - so do the search engine theme pyramids thing with good subpages and your site should do okay... easier said than done, however
You must distinguish between "topics" and "keywords" - this is what the searchbox does (or tries to, at least). If your're searching for a topic, you'll get topical matches and if you're searching for "keywords" you will get exact search. Google decides what are "topics" and what are "keywords" - we all know by now that a lot of so-called "commercial searches" seem to be topics and not just keywords, but commercial terms are not the only ones influenced, as terms are just terms, there is no "understanding", only "theming" or "semantics" or whatever you choose to call it.
Generally (and this was the case before "Florida" as well, but Google didn't discriminate before): The more words you type in the search box, the less topical your search becomes.
So, given a "topic" of "Real Estate"; if you're believed to be the authoritative ressource for everything "Real Estate" (in your area), you will come up - naturally, general directories will make that claim somewhat easier than any broker, realtor, or other specific firm. Also relevant are (in no specific order):
- government institutions in the field
- research institutions in the field
- news articles covering the field
- whitepapers covering the field
- etc.
Here "relevant" should be "relevant for a broad topic that have more than one meaning" - it seems the new algo/AS/whatever can recognize that "Real Estate" is a topic and not just two words. If it was "two words" an exact search would be carried out in stead, and the anchor text "real estate" would probably win, just like before Florida.
The plurals i qouted above was what i observed in the area of "LocationX Real Estate", as in the searches (start and end of alphabet):
"Real Estate" - really just one keyword
"Arizona Real Estate" - two keywords
"Alabama Real Estate"
"Wisconsin Real Estate"
"Wyoming Real Estate"
For Arizona, you will note that one of the top listed is a University site (....asu.edu) - as the cache of that page will show, there is no penalty for a large amount of exact keywords on page (the CNN example should alo show that). Do note that they also have other relevant words on that page, in raw text as well as anchor text and alt-text. If there ever was a keyword stuffing penalty, it was not in "Real Estate" - i haven't really seen it in any categories sofar, actually.
Some other pages have no or only a few matching keywords on page? - in the cases i've seen these pages either have:
- other relevant words on page
- a high placement in the relevant dmoz/directory cats (there is more than one cat in use when possible)
- keywords in directory description
- inbound links with relevant anchor text (broad sense of "relevant")
- on-site outbound links with relevant anchor text (broad sense of "relevant")
- off-site outbound links with relevant anchor text (broad sense of "relevant")
- relevant alt-text on images (broad sense of "relevant")
- or, they are a redirect to a relevant page
- or, they were relevant on googlebots last visit
- or, a combination of the above
So, how do i become #1 for a topic? I suspect that the first ten places for topical searches are treated differently than the rest, but that's just a feeling sofar. If so, you'll find that they are a selection of subtopics, or different angles/perspectives on the broad topic, so being the best on one of these subtopics should get you there, just as being the most complete ressource on the general topic.
Otherwise, it simply takes more to be "the best ressource" for a topic than for a keyword. A broader scope, as in "subpages for all the keywords in my previous post and not just real estate" would be one way to go.
The sad, but accurate, part is that ten places is not enough for 1,000 realtors. It wasn't before and it isn't now. Only, before you could optimize on the keyword and be treated as if you had optimized on the topic - Google had no way of dealing with topics before, everything was just keywords. Now, to be #1 for the topic, you have to optimize for the topic and not just the keyword.
The questions you should ask yourself are:
- given that my whole website is a "structured document" on a "topic", which topic is it really about?
- how do i deal with the general topic as well as subtopics in terms of front page vs. internal pages and linking structures (including anchor text)?
- given that "topic X" is what i believe my target audience is seeking information about, how do i craft a "structured document" (a web site) that will be (perceived as) the best ressource for that topic (and not not just the keywords)?
You present "evidence of topic" by including keywords in "structural elements" of the page (as well as being in the right dmoz cat, having relevant inbounds, etc), just like before Florida, but your outbound links from one page to other pages on your website help to identify your page and site topic, so pay a little extra attention to those, and do consider your site structure. Just remember the difference: Either you go for very specific content (eg. specific keywords) or you go for broad coverage of a topic.
I believe this is as far as general advice can go.
/claus
[edited by: claus at 6:39 pm (utc) on Dec. 27, 2003]
Thank you
Have you had any personal experiences with Florida?
I feel fairly comfortable is saying that the concept of natural language analysis in order to determine organic vs inorganic does NOT appear to be in play here.
The search phrase which we successfully optimized to Top-10 under the new algo involved the purchasing of widgets for a large city.
The #1 listing for this SERP is a spammy page containing a few paragraphs of "fluff" text, an affiliate link, and then a HUGH list of FONT SIZE=1 keyword phrases, such as...
orange widgets, red widgets, green widgets, blue widgets...
brandX widgets, brandY widgets, brandZ model1 widgets...
widget repair, widget parts, used widgets...
widgets new york city, widgets maryland, widgets canada...
Basically, every phrase the person could think of that included the word "widgets", relevant or not, they were just looking for raw traffic for their affiliate link.
Even at FONT SIZE=1, this keyword stuffed list was so extensive that it won't fit on 1 screen on my browser. "Widgets" is used more times than I care to count, well over a hundred.
For the SERP this page is now #1 in, 2 of the 3 keywords appear nowhere else except in this keyword stuffing, and only 1 of the 3 keywords appears in the title.
I HOPE that this is not what Google wants to see now, because I DO NOT want to make my client sites look this unprofessional/spammy!
Natural language analysis, if it were in use, would catch this in a heartbeat. Natural, organic English language does not include thousand-word sentences with a comma every 2 or 3 words! Heck, even an elementary spam filter should catch this!
For those of you that have been around that long, this reminds me of the pre-Google AltaVista SERPs!
So, it would appear that natural "organic" language analysis does not appear to be in play. The results are also consistent with my current ideas on what G is looking for, that allowed us to obtain a Top-10 result for that same SERP for a client site optimized under the new algo.
Still analyzing data, but wanted to share that discovery with the rest of you. Will update you later once secondary keyword analysis is complete.
What is stemming?
Novice here. What is "I think the introduction of stemming is what's done me in"
What is stemming?
Search Google for define stemming and you get Stemming - The ability for a search to include the "stem" of words. For example, stemming allows a user to enter "swimming" and get back results also for the stem word "swim."
There are people who post on WW that really make a huge difference. I cannot begin to tell you how valuable your last post was. Our web master was sent your thread yesterday and today he emailed me and said that he stayed up until 4am dreaming about what you had written. You have made a huge difference to the way he views the web and our sites.
Every so often someone writes an amazing piece and I must say that you personally win our 'Post of 2003' award for your amazing contribution. If there ever was a justification for me reading these forums, you have, in one post satisfied myself and our company for the whole year!
Thanks for sharing, and all the best in 2004.
Could you tell me one thing?
"if a City name is searched... what kinda sites should pop up on top according to you?"
