Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
So, just out of curiosity, if you've started new sites since this sandbox effect began, how long did it take your site(s) to get out or are you still waiting?
On another site, I accumalted 2000+ BL's to each indivisual page (80+), starting six months before the site existed, dead links for 6 months. Uploaded 2 months ago, immediate G deep crawl, Now showing in top 30 for all keywords on G, perhaps the newness.
One site been in for 14 months - 100% quality unique content - ranked very high in Yahoo and MSN, so I make a living from that traffic, plus links (most of my links are one way, from people who have linked to my site purely because of its value - so it is Google users who are losing out because they can't find it)
If the sandbox is designed to stop people building spam sites, fair enough - just be honest about it.
I want Google to admit the sandbox exists - and give the owners of quality websites the opportunity to pay for a manual editorial approval - the current situation is driving me crazy!
I want Google to admit the sandbox exists - and give the owners of quality websites the opportunity to pay for a manual editorial approval
... or perhaps pay for Adwords ;)
But seriously, you are correct, manual editing and pay for inclusion is the only real way to sort this out. Someone will come along with a better model than Google's soon.
(Don't ask me what this will be. If I had any idea I would be too busy developing it) :)
I agree - I have no problem with the concept of paying for Adwords - I don't believe I have a right to free advertising.
Trouble is, this isn't a solution for the people with non-profit sites.
And for those of us who can afford to pay, it still isn't a proper solution - you can't replace ALL the traffic you would be getting from the organic SERPS by using Adwords.
I think only about 20% of users click on Adwords - so you can only 'Buy' 20% of the traffic you are missing - no amount of money can get you the other 80%
Read it somewhere in WW - the figure of 20% may be a little out - may be 25% or 30% - but it's logical that only a percentage of people would click on them.
Many users suffer from ad blindness.
is there anybody who has lauched a new site who hasnn't experienced the sandbox effect?
We have established a website late December 2004 and within 30 days it was ranked on the top10 for its main keywords (among 900,000 results). In fact, the site gained very quickly many non-reciprocal backlinks from authoritative sites; this may be the main reason for avoiding Sandbox.
Got a site coming up to one year now, next month in fact. Still sandboxed, bloody ridiculous!
Just an update; after more or less giving up on the above site, this latest update has seen it explode out of the sandbox today with some great results and is being ranked where it deserves to be.
There is hope out there
I had one of those cheap dial-up ISPs which allow you your own 'website', sans domain.
My URL was something like www.cheaphost.com/~myname.index.html
Needless to say, that didn't set the world on fire, but did get G and Y placement on page 37 or whatever.
Then my a**hole ISP got bought out, and the buyer was bought out, and (repeat the above) until I
would up on *****shtink who decided to eliminate all those messy URLs and replace them with their own!
All my link building went down the toilet. I felt like an evicted tenant.
I was sooooo pissed that I registered my own domain name. If there are newbies here, with phony
rent-a-URLs like the above, I STRONGLY urge you to do what I did. It was surprisingly inexpensive.
With my own domain name, I have the freedom to move from one host ISP to another. They don't evict me,
I fire them. I fired my first host when I learned they were hosting spam and getting my email banned.
Sandbox? Yes I have read enough here to believe ther is such an effect. In my case however, the 'SB' was
of my own making. Once I got my own domain name registered, I felt confident enough to do some real
content and links building.
My site is not monetized for now, but may provide an income stream when I retire in 5 or 10 years.
In the meantime, I watch my SERPs, traffic, and all the good advice here for future reference.
Everything I have seen and learned persuades me that the white-hat is the only hat for the long term.
Think long term, and the sandbox is just a bump in the road. Best wishes - Larry
PS: I'm full of good Belgian beer, so forgive typos.
I have several sites that vary from 3-15 months in age (new domains). All are in the sandbox to this day. So I ignore Google entirely now. I'm making a pretty good living from Yahoo and MSN (and the littler fish), as well as the traffic from link exchanges with other sites in my niches. Google can go fly a kite with their insipid sandbox nonsense. :-)
Same situation. Several sites, most of them since October-November 2004. Rank well in Yahoo and MSN, but nowhere to be seen in G SERPs. This is quite frustrating, as we all know Google is(still) the most important search engine. So I don't think we can afford to ignore it.
Now I can understand Google is trying to discourage such practices that are against the guidelines, but 12 months in the sandbox... that seems like ages to me.Come on, Google, give us a break, we're getting old here!