Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 107.22.30.57

Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & andy langton & goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

Update Jagger, Google Update Oct 18th, 2005

When can we expect a new PR update?

     
5:33 pm on Oct 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 7, 2005
posts:106
votes: 0


Continued from here:
[webmasterworld.com...]



Anyone have any guesses as to when we can expect a new systemwide PR update?
9:37 pm on Oct 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 24, 2005
posts:6
votes: 0


We have an extensive link directory (3500+). All validated, related legitmate links. All nicely categorized by state and by category.

Jagger has brought us back from the grave.

9:40 pm on Oct 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 8, 2003
posts:98
votes: 0


I have a clean affiliate site, lots of content and very few links going out to other sites. It has held top spots for numerous keywords for over 1yr. Now I cannot find it under any of my keywords. It is only found when I search the words that make up my domain. Ex: mywebsite.com is found only when I search for “my web site” (without quotes). I have also noticed that other web sites that are doing the same affiliate program as me have disappeared. Anybody have opinions on this?
9:45 pm on Oct 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 4, 2004
posts:801
votes: 0


Oh, I should have been more specific, I'm talking about non-affiliate sites, I expect affiliates to drop due to many factors, so seeing one drop, even though it's clean, doesn't surprise me at all.

I've got to do some reading on this. All the sites I do that have no link work on them are doing either the same or better than pre jagger. But there are other differences that might make this a less meaningful observation than I want.

seotard, when you say jagger brought you back from the grave, do you mean the site was junk in the serps, low down, and now it's ranking for good target keywords? How old is the site? Did it ever rank before? And when did it drop?

also, is this a real directory in all ways, in other words, no link exchanges, no reciprocals, a pure outbound only link directory that is, usefulness being its primary purpose for existence, not seo etc?

[edited by: 2by4 at 9:50 pm (utc) on Oct. 27, 2005]

9:49 pm on Oct 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 24, 2005
posts:6
votes: 0


2by4

our site is 7 years old.

We were always (many years anyway) in the top 5 results for most terms we cared about until around June of this year then BAM - page 7 or 8.

With Jagger - we are back to top 5 again. Business has literally tripled.

Edit: oops - no it is a reciprocal link directory. I started it as a service to our visitors. Wasn't even thinking about SEO at the time.

[edited by: SEOTard at 9:53 pm (utc) on Oct. 27, 2005]

9:52 pm on Oct 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 4, 2004
posts:801
votes: 0


seotard, that's another category I hadn't even considered, but obviously well worth looking at:
sites that were down and that have recovered in jagger, those may be even more revealing.

Did you guys do anything since june to recover? I'm sure you did stuff, but anything really major? more inbound Links, non-www to www rewrites, etc

which update was that in June, I wasn't around seo at the time, came back in around bourbon, didn't follow the stuff earlier for a few months.

"no it is a reciprocal link directory. I started it as a service to our visitors. Wasn't even thinking about SEO at the time."

That's exactly what I wanted to know, I actually had typed in the word 'intention' when asking you about your directory, but I edited it out, but that really is the key word, is the intention seo, or is it real, like you have. This is getting much more interesting, thanks for that example.

[edited by: 2by4 at 9:54 pm (utc) on Oct. 27, 2005]

9:54 pm on Oct 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:July 3, 2003
posts:55
votes: 0


stinky:
I have also noticed that other web sites that are doing the same affiliate program as me have disappeared.

I have seen this with several affiliate sites that I monitor. I suspect it's a significant trend.

-S

9:57 pm on Oct 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 24, 2005
posts:6
votes: 0


2by4,

We did several things.

- Cleaned up alot of HTML code. Invalid alt tags created by mistake.

- Added about 400 pages of product specific content.

- Adjusted dynamically generated content to appear as static (changed .asp?questionID=1245 to /question1245)

- Became stricter on our reciprocal link program - tighter content restrictions, page rank requirements etc. although thousands of old links remain.

- removed SOME overly used keywords

When our site was removed I was literally shocked. We are without a doubt a VERY legitmate site in our niche.

9:58 pm on Oct 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 4, 2004
posts:801
votes: 0


If I've followed any of this correctly, which is obviously open to question, seotard, it sounds like the thing is about natural, consistent link growth. The patent talks a lot about that. My guess is that seos and their clients are generally too impatient to implement slow link building campaigns, so they go in bursts. Especially when the last burst worked.

It's just possible that the sites I'm seeing left in the serps that have heavy link building work on them have simply done the work consistently over the years, that's just a guess, and have avoided bursts, or other signs of unnatural link growth. Takes discipline though. And takes time.

<added>
"Adjusted dynamically generated content to appear as static (changed .asp?questionID=1245 to /question1245)"

this may be the one that solved your problems, this fits with what somebody else has told me.

Also of course, I have never rewritten the html of a site, cleaned up urls, added content, and seen anything but an improvement. But from what I've heard, the cleaning up of your dynamic urls to static may be what did it for you.

10:02 pm on Oct 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Dec 29, 2003
posts:5428
votes: 0


link growth might be it, but if you are on top all of the sudden, you're bound to get 100's of scrapers. 3 months later, Google will penalize you unless you have a special status
10:05 pm on Oct 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 24, 2005
posts:6
votes: 0


2by4

agreed - considering this added thousands of indexed pages WITH titles in Google.

Personally it shouldn't make a differnce. Just because the content comes from a database doesn't make it bogus. Why should I create a single document for 1000s of questions that have been answered.

Personally - nothing makes much sense about this update (except the fact that we are back up). The top ten still has KEYWORD STUFFED directory sites and one site that has been killed with Jagger2 appears to me to be VERY legit.

This 930 message thread spans 93 pages: 930