Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Have been waiting for google's pending update but didn't get any on that. From last two days I have noticed extreme changes in search results for same google domain (like .com or .de or .nl etc.) with different interface language selected (like hl=de or hl=en or hl=nl). When you change the interface language the whole bunch of results are different.
Is this the actual update this time? Enabling the geo centric data which google wanted to implement for better localization? If yes (and if someone else is also seeing this change) then may be we can all identify the parameters of this new change, like language, servers in geographical locations or extensions (.de, .nl etc.)
-- rishi
This happened in May as well. 1 month, the busiest of the year, down the drain.
Now just in time for the smaller Christmas and New Year rush.
Can't understand what's up either, haven't changed philosophies or tactics either.
Same old, content, plenty of links, clean, appreciated by users and popular.
Great stuff, now where is the patience I was speaking about yesterday.
A total discount of recip links. Which should happen there are far to many SEO people out there manipulating the results with link campaigns. (including myself) Obviously you can manipulate 1 way links as well but it is much harder.
or
Google has just reverted to August results. I think my results are very close to about the second week in August.
I monitor a lot of Financial type keywords and I have seen every keyword stuffed domain with a ton of recip links dropping way down and replaced with large company websites that are obvious leaders in the industry.
Thanks for the suggestion - I am going to need major help I think on this and asked for it in the proper forum. Hope someone can help me..........
stuff4beauty
edit: oops - didn't know there was a no linking rule. needless to say, the word "wedding invitations" in anchor repeated hundreds of times on single page.
pretty funny.
[edited by: SEOTard at 6:38 pm (utc) on Oct. 17, 2005]
LOL
Now, now don't let the link police catch you.
What no mispilling coverage I'm shocked I tell you shocked.
I have wondered for years why some of my much-wealthier competitors haven't passed me up on Google before now. Many of them had better PageRank and thousands more backlinks than I did. The only difference was that their backlinks did not have the proper anchor text phrase in them, and mine did. My assumption is that Google has now decided to give less weight to the anchor text in the backlink and more weight to the link itself. Instead of looking to the link for an anchor text phrase to rank the site under, they are looking to the content of the website to determine the proper keyword phrases to rank it under.
Should we call this the Katrina Update? It's going to cause as much financial damage as Katrina did. I am probably going to be forced to lay some people off if this sticks. Unfortunately, it looks like it probably will stick.
:-(
[edited by: Webmeister at 6:41 pm (utc) on Oct. 17, 2005]
Google has a series of "Low to High" sliders (Think graphic equalizer or sound mixing board).It's almost as if Google takes one or more of their sliders off-line to perform maintenance on them and we see their effects disappear for a while.
So they might have been testing with a few datacenters over the last week, and they might still be testing.
The only page ranking well is a supplemental page.
No recep links to it or one ways. It does have sitewide advertising links pointing to it. The keyword is not in the main URL. But is in the supplemental page name and title on the page.
I am really trying to make some sense and I know every situation is a little different. If we can figure out a pattern maybe we can adjust.
As I have posted before (and learned the hard way), a business model based on your position within the search engines is a weak one.
My last 6 months have been spent finding other ways to drive traffic and create business.
sad but true.
>Google has just reverted to August results.
I wish... we had great rankings then.
>It would seems as though Google has now allowed the sites with more backlinks to outrank the sites with less backlinks
Don't think so. We have 2500 links in which is many more than most sites now ranking above us. Many of these are good quality one way links.
I usually believe that onpage seo does little these days and its all about links, but with this update I think many answers are in simple seo tactics. There's no golden bullit, but a combination of subtle changes to be done with onpage factors.
Yep, but you can retire a lot earlier after a few years of good natural rankings :)
That's not the beauty of the web. And that's not how the web came to exist.
Google is dead
Also, google does not owe us anything, she giveth and taketh away.
Every time I read or hear this I just stare at whoever said it wondering : man, who's content does google present on their pages? Have I ever read anything produced by Google? Google does not even pay for the news they deliver like Yahoo does, everything in Google is leached from someone.
We give google free content to spider, google gives back traffic.
Saying google owes us nothing is a mathematical sin, to say the least.
Your idea of compensation seems to be limited only to money. If you don't want Google to "use" you, feel free to remove your content from them. A lot of people won't though, because they receive a real and tangible benefit in exchange for allowing google access to their content.
Your analysis of the relationship is a lot more simplistic, and erroneous than it really is.
Google is dead
Not according to Nielsen NetRatings and Hitwise.
Anyone making any progress figuring this out? Everytime I think I've found a pattern I find a site that is so contrary to the pattern that it sends me back to square one.
what if google has been tracking programs SERP monitoring programs.
It almost seems like every keyword that I actively monitor for my site has dropped yet many that I do not monitor very often have gone up.
I have noticed that doing a non-www search site:mysite.com results in many non www pages being listed as well as www pages. All of the non www pages are supplimental. None of the ww pages are listed as supplimental.
Does this hurt my ranking, or has Google attempted to rectify this by way of assigning supplemental results to the non www pages.
[edited by: CainIV at 7:43 pm (utc) on Oct. 17, 2005]
My site only has 1 way links to it and I add content once a week to it. (has about 150 pages indexed)
I have to agree with google killing itself ever since they went public. Everyone says google rules SE right now I dont think so. When the dust settles evertime Yahoo and MSN are always the ones still standing...
Lets see what happens, but now we need to figure whats going on.
One more thing the number 1 and 2 site for the KW above both buy links as well....so I dont know whats going on
and how would that improve the quality from Google's point of view?
How else do you suppose you will get people to your website. We do all kinds of different advertising and rank well on different engines. If we were a brick and mortar store it all comes down to location... location... location. Where do you get the most foot traffic and can people easily find you if they come looking?
It the same thing on the web. Free listings give you the best location possible. Being ranked well in Google puts you in the best neighborhood. Putting the time in for good rankings make great business sense. It's not the only game in town but gives me the highest ROI. Adwords do not perform nearly as well as natural listings. We use them as well as other advertising to prepare for this kind of thing.
Maybe you don't rely on your site to feed your family but we do. Getting as much exposure as possible is GREAT business sense. I have been a member here for quite some time but did not have a lot to contribute since I followed advice given here and ranked well because of it. I am happy your site is doing well in this update but have a little compassion for the rest of us.
We have done our homework and put in the time to make a successful business from it. I am sure 90% of the people here have done the same. Please keep the all your eggs in one basket to yourself. This thread is long enough already.
Webpixie
As far as a pattern goes. Are you seeing anything if you throw out the one or 2 sites that don't make fit? They may have just gotten lucky or they might be doing something else to outweigh the change.
Gweston
I thought about that too. But everyone here has been checking and some have come out on top. I would suspect people that were dropped checked a lot more than we have in the past month since everything was fine until the DC’s started shifting. I had no reason to check until then.
SO I dont know what is going on..I have to go with this being a hiccup (fingers crossed)
I don't know about #1 but with that many links who can tell.
#2 seems to be against the trend from what I have been seeing. You know better than I where he has been getting his links but from the first few pages I looked at it looks like recip links. The rest of the listing are all supplemental even #1.
If you go back 3 page into those listings most of the sites do not have the keyword phrase in their main URL.
Can anyone else take a look in their niche results to see if this is a trend? It is in mine.
Google knows the financial damage this is going to cause for the little guys on the Web. The Google index has been turned upside down, with the big-money websites at the top and the little guys at the bottom. How could they do this, knowing that it will cause thousands of Internet workers to get laid off? I guess they have so much money now that they don't care anymore.
We are still #1 for our company name but that's about it. No drop out, no penalty just much lower on all results across the board.
Thanks for alerting me to my problem - I have done a redirect from the non www to the www since it has a higher PR - Do you think that this will sovle my problem? I am still a little confused as to what the problem was. I saw it in google though after you pointed it out - the pages were less on the non www and I am not even sure how that got like that. What about all the pages it has indexed under the non www - will that straighten out in time? Thanks again for your help and time.
stuff4beauty
My market relates to retail items that are in demand for which there is no brick and mortor option. So the online sales are basically the entire market. It can be quite profitable. But it's also rough.
All of the sites that are ranking well exchange links and buy directory listings. Most of them buy text links and do at least some site wide linking. Many of them spam keywords, blog spam and use other frowned apon tactics.
And the new SERPS are basically the same people near the top in a shuffled order. So it's been tough to nail anything down. In the top ten there's at least one site that is breaking any given rule to the extreme.
I'm working on a list of the other sites which had major drops in ranking like mine and I'm going to look at them for a pattern. So far the only thing I've found is that they are all relatively new sites, like mine. But that's with a limited group of sites to compare and only sites in my market. Right now my gut says I'm back in the sandbox. But that's not based on any solid data.
It like corporate rules and if you want to do something little man buy adowrds...I hope this is the start of the downfall to the "mighty" G$$GLE
