Forum Moderators: open
In the past, I have submitted as follows:
1. Yahoo Directory (still $300?).
2. DMOZ.
3. Google link submission.
4. AltaVista link submission.
5. MSN SubmitIt! to cover the host of other auto-submittable top-tier engines, including MSN.
6. *** Inktomi to get me into Yahoo.
Now I know that #6 is not possible anymore and that Yahoo has gone to a pay-for-indexing model. However, I never paid for indexing my current sites and they do very well on Yahoo.
My first question is how to get into Yahoo without paying for it (pay to submit is ok, but pay-per-click is not).
Second, is it still ok to use SubmitIt, I've read here that some people think this is a bad idea.
Finally, is anyone else willing to share their recipe for success in submitting new sites to search engines?
Thank you for your time and your experience.
How to launch a new siteLOL a new site in Google. Take a number (5,487,032,876), currently serving 78.
when Google rankings are the main objective
"pssst. . .......I heard sumthin...!""
Google iz dyin!"'.."" !
I came across some advice elsewhere (on another site), claiming that the 'sandbox' could be avoided by seeking links on unique IPs on relevant sites with unrelated sets of backlinks.
What do you mean when you say "I'd also like to know if there is a strategy to avoid the sandbox by gently ramping up the inbound links."
Can you please explain "strategy to avoid the sandbox by gently ramping up the inbound links"?
Ok ... so I'm feeling like the last guy in the room to find out someone died.
What happened to G? What does it mean that its full? They ran out of disk space? No more soup for me?
What is the reality behind the distinct impression that I am getting that a new site doesn't stand a chance on G?
Thanks for your help!
So Google is not full.
New pages and new sites get indexed all the time.
Agreed. This "Google is full" talk is nonsense. Take a drive down 280 and 85 and go on a tour yourself. It will change your opinion of Google, most said out of speculation and not based on fact.
CaboWabo
What is the reality behind the distinct impression that I am getting that a new site doesn't stand a chance on G?
I haven't seen this in my experience. I put up a site for a client at the end of August and it got indexed fairly quickly with just one link from one of my sites on a PR5 links page (only 13 outbound links).
I just put up another site last week and added a link to it from the home page of one of my PR5 sites and added it to three of the larger specialized directories in it's niche. It was sidered and I am already getting some traffic to it from Google. I needed to slowly increase the inbound links, but I never go crazy wtih them.
I think a lot of this sandbox talk is from SEO who try to have hundreds or thousands of links to their site as soon as they are uploaded. These links are usually way off topic for the site and they are pobably getting penalized before they get in. I regurarly get link requests that a so blatently auto generated that I don't even bother to say no.
Does WW use the noarchive tag? I'm not seeing any cache link for the pages here.
Nevermind I just checked. Certainly doesn't seem to hurt ranking.
I haven't seen this in my experience. I put up a site for a client at the end of August and it got indexed fairly quickly with just one link from one of my sites on a PR5 links page (only 13 outbound links).
I am fed up hearing from people who deny the existence of the Google Lag/Sandbox, call it what you will, but it is a fact. It is there, it is real, it is happening now and it has affected all of the sites I have created since February this year.
I build small web sites that are mainly online brochures for small businesses including some non-profit sites. They don't get many inbound links, just a few, and none of them have managed to generate any Google traffic. The sites that I created before this have all done well. I don't profess to know why the sandbox is there or how to beat it but I believe that most of those who have probably managed it by accident.
If you are launching a new site the hard truth is that you must forget about Google.
I build small web sites that are mainly online brochures
Well, I would never expect a "brochure" site to rank well for anything, not even its company name.
I would rethink your design template, or continue to expect your client sites to not rank.
I put a new domain online on September 4th, have two inbound links pointed to it (from a Pr 4 and a Pr 5 page), and it started getting Google search traffic within 4 days.
I make content-rich websites and the content is getting tons of "bottom feeder" traffic.
What I see the "sandbox", in this site's case is ignoring anchor text (external and internal) and only crediting on page content.
Since the weight of on page content is fairly minimal in the ranking formula of G's algo, this is perhaps why people cannot "force" sites to rank.
All I can say is that the more quality content I add to the site, the more G traffic the site pulls and I am confident that once I reach X threshold, Google will start crediting my anchor text as well.
All I can say is that the more quality content I add to the site, the more G traffic the site pulls and I am confident that once I reach X threshold, Google will start crediting my anchor text as well.My sandboxed domains get traffic from Google everyday for obscure but relevant terms. The terms it ranked #1 for before switching domain names it ranks deep in the hundreds now. It has gained more links since the move than it had before the move plus the old links are 301'd to the new pages. It is not a brochure site (although I see no reason why any site shouldn't rank for a unique name, this shows how bad Google is). It is 250 pages of completely unique content with an additional 1200 pages of galleries and images. On my mature (unsandboxed domain) I can put up a single link to a page on the sandboxed domain and the mature page will show up in the top ten for the related search within two days. The sandboxed domain, which has over 100 unique pages on the subject does not show up at all.
Well, I would never expect a "brochure" site to rank well for anything, not even its company name.
I advise my clients on this. Those who don't have any real content for their sites are told not to expect any traffic from Google (although they get some from other sources.) I have however created a few content rich sites with lots of useful, original material. One of them is for an agency that supplies a highly specific type of personnel.
The website is full of useful content. It contains loads of advice and information of the kind that this type of personnel would find extremely helpful and interesting. Google however, does not think so and that is wrong.
Also, why wouldn't you expect a site to rank for its company name? That's crazy. If a site is named "Lemuel's Magic Widget Company" and I do a search for that specific string I expect it to be amongst the top ranked sites. Any search engine that doesn't put it there is defective.
I put a new domain online on September 4th, have two inbound links pointed to it (from a Pr 4 and a Pr 5 page), and it started getting Google search traffic within 4 days.
You never said how much traffic it was getting ;)
The sites I have created also get G search traffic but not nearly as much as they deserve. I don't profess to be a SEO expert but I have had success with other sites in the past. One of my own sites holds the number one position for a highly coveted acronym and several other terms. It has been up there now for nearly two years and it beats the **** out of a few multi-national corporations so I must be doing something right?
No, I'm sorry, but we must wake up to the fact that if you are launching a new site there is just nothing you can do to get it ranked in Google. Google ain't working!
