Forum Moderators: open
That is to say, should one be checking to see if the sites are out of the sandbox regularly or only when they know there is a major Google update? :)
Thanks
Mc
Page: "If you’re spending time, trouble and money promoting your results, why not just buy advertising? We sell it, and it’s effective. Use that instead."
To me, that says it all...buy Adwords!
End of the story!
That is a good point about paying for advertising. You don't get nearly as many visitors. I might add that in some areas I do much better approaching large sites directly to get advertising, and the ROI was 10 times better than Adwords.
I doubt there is a query that cannot be answered by an existing established site.Try searching for any business that recently put up a website using the business name (adding the city won't help either). Alternatively you can look at message #33 in this thread.
The word to remember in the above statement is "was"
Anyway, one may be in for a surprise if taking ALL costs into account when figuring out ROI - e.g. the time spent in this forum times $ (enter your pay per hour) just to keep up on the latest rumor about G algo etc.
As has been said so often here and in many other places: If your business model depends on free traffice, you may need to rethink.
BeeDeeDubbleU:
Repeat after me ... this is intentional. There is no way that this is a defect.
This is intentional. There is no way that this is a defect.
This is intentional. There is no way that this is a defect.
This is intentional. There is no way that this is a defect.
:-)
We already have googlewhacks. That is where you come up with a search that returns only one result in Google. For instance 'beagle removably'.
Lets come up with searches that produce the website in Yahoo or MSN, but not Google. The site must be indexed by Google, however.
We can call it Googlefarts ;)
Getting high quality links is the worst thing to do in terms of sandboxing.
it sounds backwards, but from my own (frustrating) experiences, steveb's observation is right on target.
95% of my inbound links are high quality, on-topic links, mainly from sites ranking above mine for the same term (for which these other sites are *not* optimized). my site is stuck in the sandbox, while semi-relevant sites (with no inbound links with the keyphrase) rule the SERPS. it's time to go get some crappy links. . .
Seach for Bluefind
#1 in [beta.search.msn.com...]
#1 in [search.yahoo.com...]
#46 (not the homepage) in [google.com...]
<owner-edit>no, crappy links wont help in google as the above example shows</owner-edit>
BTW Google. That one really hurts people.
Um... huh? Obviously those example don't show anything concerning crappy links.
I wonder if this could eventually lead to a class action suit, or trouble with the government.
No chance.
I aggree that that (crappy links) depends on perception.
my 2cents (euro) from good old europe, but I could be wrong...
breast cancer foundation of arizona
Excellent example!
MSN Search Marketing Team, listen, all you have to do to promote you search engine is to make a big list of all such queries and advertise real hard while the Google Sandbox lasts.
When I first joined this forum, there were a bunch of defenders of Altavista, but the overall mood was people were pissed (can I say that?) because AltaVista was not updating with NEW INFORMATION.
I tried to argue that AltaVista was going down fast, but I was out debated. Basically, the argument was something along the lines that there was no way that AltaVista would lose it's position because they reinvented search as we know it.
I am in a much different position now. Google has been good to me. I have optimized my sites, and I feel the sites that rank well deserve to be there because I worked hard to get them there, and created "good places" that are valuable to people.
The reason we have the sandbox
But recently, I have been putting out NEW INFORMATION that I know is valuable to people. I have created more "good places", but Google doesn't update as often. There are claims to contrary.
Google says they are on a constant update, but really this so called "constant update" is inferior. I believe the "constant update" is really an excuse. They are using "Freshbot" info, but they are no longer able to cope with calcualating PageRank across 8 billion pages. So ... we have the sandbox, plain and simple.
Conclusion
Many times on this forum, I have called myself a "Google Fan", but my patience is wearing thin. Maybe Google's stock price is doing great, or all the BIG SITES are ranked well, so nobody cares about the rest. But I think Google can do better. And if they can't, someone else will!
breast cancer foundation of arizona
Congratulation, Powdork! That is indeed a great example. On the datacenter I hit when I searched for that, the most appropriate site for this query was listed by Google at position 335.
breast cancer foundation of arizona
We should come up with a list of all such useful examples. If press gets hold of such a list of keywords and then compares the Google search with Yahoo or MSN beta, then this could make a interesting piece of story for them and they could even publish it.
Does anyone have any good contacts in press, maybe we could prepare a good report with all such examples and submit it to various news sites. Any ideas on how to go forward with this?
(TIA) :)
breast cancer foundation of arizona
Powdork, guess my spending time on your sandlag survey was well spent ;)
Mc
Could you illuminate be about this breast cancer thing?
There is only one site that has this phrase as its official name and doesn't rank within 100. Search in MSN beta and you will know which site are we talking about.
Mc
dvduval
Try the search on Y G and MSN. There is one site that shows up in the top 5 on Y and MSN, but not in the top 300 on G. The site has been indexed since March, has over 900 backlinks from authoritiy sites and otherwise, is designed for the user, but can't be found on Google even when searching by it's exact and unique name.
In short, its one smelly googlefart.
Pull my finger.
Steveb - You suggest getting links from sites/pages that already rank well for your phrase (normally sites that have established their authority status in the field) is the sure way to get sandboxed, which I read as something to stay away from.
Two contrasting opinions. Is there a middle ground?
Mc
