Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
With good advice from WW plus some hard work, I edged my way up to some decent ratings over time.
Somehow in all of this, I never saw anything resembling the sandbox (SB) effect; nothing artificial.
If I hadn't read about SB here, I wouldn't know what anyone was talking about. Questions arise:
1) Are non-commercial and/or hobby sites like mine immune to the SB effect?
2) Did the SB effect arise suddenly, arbitrarily, as if by decree or algorithmic change? -or-
3) Does the SB simply result from 'overload', i.e. the inability of any SE to index a web that grows like
gangbusters?
The key to # 2 and 3 above is how the SB (if there is one) presented itself.
IF the SB crept in gradually, almost imperceptibly at first, then steadily worsening, that argues for #3.
IF SB fell down like an overnight curse, that argues for #2.
Either way, its a little peek into the Googlerithm. -Larry
In answer to your questions and AFAIK ...
1) No
2) Yes
3) No.
I simply pointed a couple of links to it to get it listed. And it was No 1 in the serps within 2 days.
Admittedly the search term is a single word - and essentially a company name rather than a well known english word.
But I can't see any evidence of a sandbox. In fact the speculator who bought the .com for that word
(and asked X000 dollars for it) was immediately pushed to No 2 as soon as my site was listed.
Is there really such a thing as a sandbox? - I doubt it.
GG doesn't exactly help - "3.5 changes.." That is just nonsense speak :-)
There has also been some speculation that it affects you more if your keywords are in a 'money' sector.
There is speculation that you can briefly float to the top, then sink into the bottom of the sandbox for a couple/few/many months.
In my experience this is not speculation but fact.
3) Does the SB simply result from 'overload', i.e. the inability of any SE to index a web that grows
I suspect that's the simple truth.
The idea that G puts sites on hold waiting for...
well, what?
I suspect the effect is real, but the cause misinterpreted.
(Google is capable of massive incompetence just as well as anyone else - and don't we all know it.)
So the fact you rank for your company name is something that happens to almost all sites initially..
There is no sandbox.
The occurence of new domain firstly being listed and then dropped should be attributed to some filters (but no new site = on hold) who come into play gradually after initial scoring.
The occurence of new domain firstly being listed and then dropped should be attributed to some filters (but no new site = on hold) who come into play gradually after initial scoring = Sandbox
(or if you don't like the term sandbox call it what you like.) ;)
The new site has now disappeared - it doesn't even appear on a search using the full domain name.
I pointed a couple of links to it. It appeared for 3 days, and now it has gone entirely.
(by gone - I don't mean off the radar - I mean not listed.)
A penalty is out of the question.
It's going to be a bit difficult though for our potential customers. When the product is launched (it has social benefits) no-one will be able to find it.
...= Sandbox(or if you don't like the term sandbox call it what you like.) ;)
No.
When introduced, the Sandbox had clear meaning: delaying or defering prominent rankings for a NEW site/domain.
The original estimate was 6-12 months delay before the site comes back into the normal serps.
See still unanswered question to GG from DaveAtIFG here:
[webmasterworld.com...] , #130.
Since recently, many have been using the word "Sandbox" for any case where a page is nowhere to find, being far away in ranking from "proper position".
Instead, I would recommend another appropriate term also often used: oblivion.
