Forum Moderators: open
steveb, I believe the 64.x.x.x data center has the change, but I'm not positive. We use different terminology inside Google. :)
Powdork, I'm not sure if you'd call it an update exactly (different algorithms play more of a role than different data). But I'm guessing the change will probably roll out over the course of the weekend.
That was my thought, initially. However, there are sites that didn't clear the hurdle that have 400-500 backlinks - not huge, but not tiny.
BTW- a bit off subject, but has anyone else who lost out on the 'changes' recently found themselves trying to up the conversion of leads to sales ratio? I spent so much time worrying about searches I never worried enough about ROI. My site has actually performed better after florida despite getting less traffic.
I hope G doesn't make me lazy agin with this new update and stick me at no. 1 ;-)
Heres to all those who didnt change too much ;)
dazzlindonna, I sat down with another engineer with over your feedback earlier this week. That one government agency has a bad name that happens to coincide directly with the search you mentioned, but I agree that Brandy makes that search better than before.
pavlin, for the search you sent in, you were talking about 6 DMOZ results--at least now it's just two when I checked a couple days ago. :)
Going way way back earlier in the thread, someone asked about link:www.domain.com vs. link: www.domain.com (with a space). The correct one is without a space. Otherwise, I think it does a search for "link" as a word.
Okay, back to my "official" work, but I'll keep checking in.
If 64.. sticks, it sucks.
Now, with 64... I am number 5 with a bunch of directories above me.
216... still has me at the top with the same directories spread out through the top 20.
I'm obviously upset because my site has dropped with 64..., but I have reason to be if directories comprise the top 5 positons.
Directories have been ranking higher and higher with each algo change. If I want a directory I will go to DMOZ and search through it.
Now, if a user wants to find web design in my area they have to do a Google search, which returns a list of design firms, then click on a directory link, which provides the same list that Google results provides.
Result = one more click for the searcher and less Adwords views. Bad all around for Google!
Merci!
Our site was hurt bad recently. It disapeared from our "two keywords", because google suddently indexed our index without www. (pr0) instead of our site with www. (pr6) as it did before, because a site linked us without the .www.
I added a redirect 301, and our site index is back in the latest update..... on page 3 instead of being on first page, so the severe damage is not yet cured.
Our site is the number 1 resource for our two keyword in a hot emerging field, and I think google is still not displaying us in the right place....
For example, another site' page linking to our site is on the first page, when the page itself of our site is on the 3rd page. This is not normal.
There are many bad quality resource for the 2 keywords before our site. And this is not just a subjective opinion of an upset user. The point is: this update has not yet cured the heavy damage from the www./no www. problem and our pr6 is still way below some pr 0 for the same keywords.
Do not rely on free serps for 100% of visitors/revenue.
Since Florida (in which my boat sunk), I developed a compitent AdWords campaign that allowed me to stay at pre-florida revenue levels, at a cost of 20% of my net margin. Post Brandy, my plans are to MAINTAIN the campaigns and develop other programs such as AdSense on a strictly informational site.
Didn't enjoy the turmoil, but it has definitely made me stronger.
Nice one GG. Best one for a while. I could not find what I wanted on the current serps. Searched on 64.233.161.x and found it in the first 5 results. Oh yes and my SERPS are fine too ;)
Our pages got PR5 and 4's last PR update, we have good backlinks with anchor text, good content, we have a good site! I wouldn't expect us to be in the top 20 or 30 to be perfectly honest - just somewhere in the first 5 or 6 pages would be nice.
We were listed in the foreign google (.fr, .de) very well during the Austin update for a while at least, but now we cant be found anywhere.
Does being a new site hurt? i.e. launched in November last year?
I just noticed that an allinanchor:kw1 kw2 search puts us at number three, first page.
Someone please shed some light on this for me, I could lose my job here.
[edited by: ntrance at 9:17 pm (utc) on Feb. 13, 2004]
Bronco you got it. You must have a healthy mix. We also do stuff offline and have affiliate programs etc. I really hate losing my SERPS but once it has happened a few times you become more resilient.
But the real questions are in the other points - the reverse link handling, the OOP myth and the droping sites, the dominancy of the "preffered sites" even in the Brandy results and what is happening to the sites that the algo fails to "understand".
While I am not happy about seeing more competition for our keywords, it does make for better results to the end user.
it stands at 4th
I never tracked this earlier....anybody knows where it stood earlier?
thats irony!
[edited by: wanna_learn at 9:57 pm (utc) on Feb. 13, 2004]
Its really good to know that not only do you listen but you also act on the feedback you got. Thanks for confirming that 64.233.161.x will be moving over to the other datacentres. We can start the party early.
Did you ever receive my Austin report. I got a strange reply from Google saying something about our search engineers working on a problem with the DMOZ directory.
This update has restored my faith in a few things not least the Google SERPs.
Best wishes
Sid
I checked five minutes ago and saw our new placement. Not sure how long it will be up - but it was nice to see.
Chris
I have recently launched a few new content sites - decent rankings on "old" the "new" one is not as strong
Any thoughts on the importantce of links / anchor text for this "new" change
Regarding older versus newer sites, the old debate is whether older sites simply have more backlinks, and therefore tend to do better...or whether age bumps your quality standing in G's eyes. I don't know, though I've always suspected that age may play some small role on the plus side.
A roll back - new algo - new data?
We are seeing new data being brought in from this morning on 64.
Hooray! Hooray! Thank you Google!
I like it for my areas. The last update really had me pushing the 8-ball trying to figure out how to fix whatever was wrong. I really didn't change anything on my sites, but I did launch a massive link campaign, but I doubt they are effecting this update at all.
What a nice thread :)
From when this first appeared about 14 hours ago there has been significant jiggling around. A little while ago it seems some of the "piffle" sites I refered to earlier -- low relevance but pretending to be relevant via keyword-hyphn-domain and other simple seo -- have disappeared. Some still there though.
In other words, 64* is a bit better than it was at the start, so some change has occured and may still occur.
And just to beat the dead horse, overall another nice improvement from Google.
===
Should have been "crazy janey" and "the chicken man"...
Thanks
[64.233.161.98...]
